Comparative analysis of access to patented HIV/AIDS pharmaceutical medicines through the Canadian and EU trips flexibilities measures: are they efficacious or overly burdensome and ineffective measures?
Abstract
This paper evaluates the Canadian and the European Union's (EU) implementation
of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) General Council Decision of 2003, which
resolved that developed nations could export patented pharmaceutical drugs to
member states in order to address public health challenges such as Human
Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (HIV/AIDS),
tuberculosis, malaria and other epidemics, such states including Sub-Saharan Africa
(SSA). The author makes a primarily textual appraisal of how and to what extent the
Canada Access to Medicine Regime (CAMR) and European Union (EU) Regulations
benefit, for instance, SSA countries in the WTO in their quest to make essential
medicine more accessible. The author argues that although there are identifiable
complexities inherent in the Canadian and the EU's access to pharmaceutical
product regimes, there are far more important incentives and benefits that can be
reaped in taking advantage of the respective systems. The author recommends that
countries facing public health crises/emergencies, such as SSA countries, and nongovernmental
organisations (NGOs) take advantage of the regulatory flexibilities of
Canada and the EU in their efforts to provide their communities with essential
HIV/AIDS treatment, and treatment for other diseases such as malaria. The author
dismisses the arguments against TRIPS (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property) flexibilities-inspired legislation and similar measures as mostly mere
rhetoric and hair-splitting, because they sometimes unwarrantedly dismiss a
workable solution to public-health problems.