Novartis, India and Patents
Tuesday, 28 August 2007

Corpobligation.com: Battling PR campaigns over the future of drug access, production and patents

  • A fight over the patentability of a cancer drug (Glivic, Gleevic, Imatinib) produced by Novartis has led to a wider debate around patents over drugsglivec.jpg
  • Patents are Good: encourage innovation and risk taking, by preserving long term profits
  • Patents are Bad: prevent access to drugs because the patent holder charges more than generic drug makes would charge
  • Novartis challenged Indian patent law for failing to provide sufficient protection from the competition under WTO rules
  • Groups like Medicins Sans Frontieres (Doctors without Borders) disagreed arguing that drug access was vital for worldwide health, especially in developing countries
  • Corporate Obligation? Did Novartis do the right thing strategically? They donate many treatments in India (99% according to their site) of Glivic and they have been upfront with their position; yet, a worldwide coalition formed to attack them. How can NGOs and governments create incentives to drive drug innovation?

 

 

The Battling Press Releases: Novartis & Medicins Sans Frontieres
Novartis Concerned Indian court ruling will discourage investments in innovation need to bring better medicines to patients

 

Mumbai, India, August 6, 2007 - A decision issued today in an Indian court will have long-term negative consequences for research and development into better medicines for patients in India and abroad.
The High Court in Chennai dismissed the writ petition challenging the constitutionality of Section 3(d), and deferred to the World Trade Organization (WTO) forum to resolve the TRIPS compliance question. The full text of the Court's decision is not yet issued.
"We disagree with this ruling, however we likely will not appeal to the Supreme Court. We await the full decision to better understand the Court's position," said Ranjit Shahani, Vice-Chairman and Managing Director, Novartis India Limited. "Our actions advanced this essential debate in India; now local and international leaders in both industry and academia recognize the inadequacies of Section 3(d) and are raising serious concerns about the deficiencies of the Indian patent system."
Novartis brought this case forward because it firmly believes this was the right thing to do for patients. Effective patent systems ensure incentives are in place that stimulate long-term research and development efforts critical for medical progress.
"It is clear there are inadequacies in Indian patent law that will have negative consequences for patients and public health in India," said Paul Herrling, Ph.D., Head of Corporate Research at Novartis. "Medical progress occurs through incremental innovation. If Indian patent law does not recognize these important advances, patients will be denied new and better medicines."
Novartis cares about patients and access to medicine
Through the Glivec International Patient Assistance Program (GIPAP), Novartis provides Glivec free of charge to 99% of patients in India prescribed the medicine for as long as they need it.

 

Contact

Svetlana Pinto
Novartis India Media Relations
+91 22 2495 1074 (direct)
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Carrie Scott
Novartis Global Media Relations
+41 61 324 3435 (direct)
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
e-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Indian Court Ruling in Novartis Case Protects India as the 'Pharmacy of the Developing World'

New Delhi/Geneva, August 6, 2007 ...

Novartis took the Indian government to court over its 2005 Patents Act because it wanted a more extensive granting of patent protection for its products than offered by the law. Novartis claimed that India's Patents Act did not meet rules set down by the World Trade Organization and was in violation of the Indian constitution. Apparently all of Novartis's claims have been rejected by the High Court today.

India only began giving patents on medicines to comply with WTO rules, but it designed its law with safeguards so that patents can only be granted for real innovations. This means that companies seeking a patent for modifications to a molecule already invented, in order to extend ever further their monopolies on existing drugs, would be unsuccessful in India. It is this aspect of the law that Novartis was seeking to have removed. A ruling in favor of the company would have drastically restricted the production of affordable medicines in India that are crucial for the treatment of diseases throughout the developing world.

Developing country governments and international agencies like UNICEF and the Clinton Foundation rely heavily on importing affordable drugs from India, and 84% of the antiretrovirals that MSF prescribes to its patients worldwide come from Indian generic companies. India must be allowed to remain the 'pharmacy of the developing world.'

... . An MSF petition urging Novartis to drop the case gathered over 420,000 signatures.

 




Del.icio.us!Facebook!Slashdot!Technorati!StumbleUpon!
 
< Prev