Pharmaceutical Patents and Human Development in Sub-Saharan Africa

Chapter

Abstract

The analyses in the preceding chapters have shown that law is integral to development. Yet laws do not themselves give rise to development unless they are properly situated within their social context and realities. Fuller once observed that, “for a given social context one form of law may be more appropriate than another, and that the attempt to force a form of law upon a social environment uncongenial to it may miscarry with damaging results.” This idea that laws must reflect social realities is equally germane in the implementation of international norms on patents in SSA. The patent system is the most widely used form of juridical control of pharmaceuticals in the global marketplace. As Oguamanam aptly explains, “of all the regimes of IP, patent is the most relevant to pharmaceutical research both in terms of the subject matter of pharmaceutical innovation and in consideration of the imperative in that industry for a stronger and more exclusive protective regime.” And private pharmaceutical companies employ the globalized patent regime and its domestic prototypes to regulate the prices of medicines on the market. This private regulation of pharmaceuticals reduces the availability of and/or access to medicines to alleviate human suffering, which in turn affects human survival and development.

Keywords

Intellectual Property Supra Note Patent System International Patent Compulsory License 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Bibliography

Literature

  1. ’t Hoen EFM (2009) The global politics of pharmaceutical monopoly power: drug patents, access, innovation and the application of WTO declaration on TRIPS and public health. AMB, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbott FM (2005) The WTO medicines decision: world pharmaceutical trade and the protection of public. Am J Int Law 99:317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amani B (2009) State agency and the patenting of life in international law: merchants and missionaries in a global society. Ashgate, SurreyGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbosa DB et al (2007) Slouching towards development in international intellectual property. Mich St Law Rev 71Google Scholar
  5. Boutros-Ghali B (1994) An agenda for development, UN DoC A/48/935 (UN, 6 May 1994). Online: www.un.org/Docs/SG/agdev.html
  6. Bush R (2007) Poverty & neoliberalism: persistence and reproduction in the global south. Pluto Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Cann WA (2004) On the relationship between intellectual property rights and the need of less-developed countries for access to pharmaceuticals: creating a legal duty to supply under a theory of progressive global constitutionalism. Univ Pa J Int Econ Law 25:755Google Scholar
  8. Carrier MA (2004) Cabining intellectual property through a property paradigm. Duke Law J 54:1Google Scholar
  9. Cho S (2005) Linkage of free trade and social regulation: moving beyond the entropic dilemma. Chic J Int Law 625Google Scholar
  10. Chon M (2006) Intellectual property and the development divide. Cardozo Law Rev 27:2821Google Scholar
  11. Chon M (2007) Substantive equality in international intellectual property norm setting and interpretation. In: Gervais DJ (ed) Intellectual property, trade and development: strategies to optimize economic development in a TRIPS-plus era. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 475Google Scholar
  12. Cornish WR (1999) Intellectual property: patents, copyright, trademarks and allied rights, 4th edn. Sweet & Maxwell, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. de Beer J (2009a) Defining WIPO’s development agenda. In: de Beer J (ed) Implementing the World Intellectual Property Organization’s development agenda. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Ottawa, p 1Google Scholar
  14. de Beer J (ed) (2009b) Implementing the World Intellectual Property Organization’s development agenda. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  15. Drahos P (2010) The global governance of knowledge: patent offices and their clients. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elliot R (2007) Delivering on the pledge: global access to medicines, WTO rules, and reforming Canada’s law on compulsory licensing for export. McGill JSDLP 3:23Google Scholar
  17. Engelbrekt AB (2011) The WTO dispute settlement system and the evolution of international IP law: an institutional perspective. In: Kur A, Levin M (eds) Intellectual property rights in a fair world trade system: proposals for reform of TRIPS. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 106Google Scholar
  18. Fink C, Maskus KE (eds) (2005) Intellectual property and development: lessons from recent economic research. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Fisher WW, Syed T (2007) Global justice in healthcare: developing drugs for the developing world. UC Davis Law Rev 40:581Google Scholar
  20. Fuller LL (1969) Human interaction and the law. Am J Juris 14:1Google Scholar
  21. Gervais DJ (2009) (Re)implementing the agreement on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights to Foster innovation. J World Intellect Prop 12:348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gold ER, Morin J-F (2009) From agenda to implementation: working outside the WIPO box. In: de Beer J (ed) Implementing the World Intellectual Property Organization’s development agenda. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Ottawa, p 57Google Scholar
  23. Gold R et al (2008) Toward a new era of intellectual property: from confrontation to negotiation. A report from the international expert group on biotechnology, innovation and intellectual property. Online: http://www.theinnovationpartnership.org/data/ieg/documents/report/TIP_Report_E.pdf
  24. Goodwin PE (2008) Right idea, wrong result – Canada’s access to medicines regime. Am J Law Med 34:567Google Scholar
  25. Government of Canada (2007) Report of the statutory review of Sections 21.01 to 21.19 of the Patent Act. http://camr-rcam.hc-sCgCca/index_e.html
  26. Gyekye K (1994) Taking development seriously. J Appl Philos 11:45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harris DP (2006) Carrying a joke too far: TRIPS and treaties of adhesion. Univ Pa J Int Econ Law 27:681Google Scholar
  28. Haugen HM (2010) Access versus incentives: analyzing intellectual property policies in four UN specialized agencies by emphasizing the role of the World Intellectual Property Organization and Human Rights. J World Intellect Prop 13:697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Helfer LR (2004) Regime shifting: the TRIPs agreement and new dynamics of international intellectual property lawmaking. Yale J Int Law 29:1Google Scholar
  30. Hestermeyer H (2007) Human rights and the WTO: the case of patents and access to medicines. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  31. Idris K (2003) Intellectual property: a power tool for economic growth. WIPO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  32. Khor M, Shashikant S (eds) (2009) Negotiating a ‘Development Agenda’ for the World Intellectual Property Organization. TWN, PenangGoogle Scholar
  33. Kur A (2011) Limitations and exceptions under the three-step test – how much room to walk the middle ground? In: Kur A, Levin M (eds) Intellectual property rights in a fair world trade system: proposals for reform of TRIPS. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 208Google Scholar
  34. Kwakwa E (2002) Some comments on rulemaking at the World Intellectual Property Organization. Duke J Comp Int Law 12:179Google Scholar
  35. Levin M (2011) The pendulum keeps swinging – present discussions on and around the TRIPS agreement. In: Kur A, Levin M (eds) Intellectual property rights in a fair world trade system: proposals for reform of TRIPS. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 3Google Scholar
  36. Maskus KE (2005) Using the International Trading System to Foster Technology transfer for economic development. Mich St Law Rev 2005:219Google Scholar
  37. Maskus KE (ed) (2008) Intellectual property, growth and trade. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  38. Meier GM (1989) Leading issues in economic development, 5th edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Mey BP (2010) Unfettered consumer access to affordable therapies in the post-TRIPS era: a dead-end journey for patients? Kenya and India case studies. J World Intellect Prop 13:403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mgbeoji I (2007) TRIPS and TRIPS-plus impacts in Africa. In: Gervais DJ (ed) Intellectual property, trade and development: strategies to optimize economic development in a TRIPS-plus era. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 259Google Scholar
  41. Nussbaum MC (1997) Capabilities and human rights. Fordham Law Rev 66:273Google Scholar
  42. Nussbaum M (2000) Women and human development: the capabilities approach. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nussbaum MC (2008) Constitutions and capabilities: ‘perception against lofty formalism. Harv Law Rev 121:4Google Scholar
  44. Oguamanam C (2006) International law and indigenous knowledge: intellectual property, plant biodiversity, and traditional medicine. University of Toronto Press, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  45. Oguamanam C (2010) Patents and pharmaceutical R&D: consolidating private–public partnership approach to global public health crises. J World Intellect Prop 13:556Google Scholar
  46. Oguamanam C (2011) IP in global governance: a venture in critical reflection. WIPO J 2:196Google Scholar
  47. Okediji RL (2007) The limits of development strategies at the intersection of intellectual property and human rights. In: Gervais DJ (ed) Intellectual property, trade and development: strategies to optimize economic development in a TRIPS-plus era. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 355Google Scholar
  48. Oppong RF (2006) Trade and human rights: a perspective for agents of trade policy using a rights-based approach to development. Afr Hum Rts Law J 6:123Google Scholar
  49. Oppong RF (2011) Legal aspects of economic integration in Africa. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Oxfam (2008) Ending the R&D crisis in public health: promoting pro-poor medical innovation, Oxfam International Briefing Paper No. 22, (Oxford, November 2008). Online: http://www.oxfam.org/policy/ending-r-and-d-crisis-public-health
  51. Pauwelyn J (2001) The role of public international law in the WTO: how far can we go? Am J Int Law 95:535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rao JM (1999) Equity in a global public goods framework. In: Kaul I et al (eds) Global public goods: international cooperation in the 21st century. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  53. Robinson M (2001) Making the global economy work for human rights. In: Sampson GP (ed) The role of the World Trade Organization in global governance. United Nations University Press, Tokyo, p 209Google Scholar
  54. Roose-Snyder B, Doyle MK (2009) The global health licensing program: a new model for humanitarian licensing at the University Level. Am J Law Med 35:281Google Scholar
  55. Ruse-Khan HG (2011) Assessing the need for a general public interest exception in the TRIPS agreement. In: Kur A, Levin M (eds) Intellectual property rights in a fair world trade system: proposals for reform of TRIPS. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 167Google Scholar
  56. Sampath G (2006) India’s product patent protection regime: less or more of ‘pills for the poor’? J World Intellect Prop 9:694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sell SK (2003) Private power, public law: the globalization of intellectual property rights. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sen A (1999) Development as freedom. Anchor Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  59. Sheerwood R (1990) Intellectual property and economic development. Westview Press, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  60. Srivastava S, Satyanarayana K (2008) Amendment of Article 31(f) is far from a ‘solution’. Indian J Med Res 84Google Scholar
  61. Stewart J (2004) Stewart’s quotable Africa. Penguin Books, JohannesburgGoogle Scholar
  62. Stiglitz JE (2002) Globalization & its discontents. W.W. Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  63. Stiglitz JE, Charlton A (2005) Fair trade for all: how trade can promote development. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  64. UNCTAD-ICTSD (2005) Resource book on TRIPS and development. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. UNDP (1996) Human development REPORT 1996: economic growth and human development. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  66. UNDP (1999) Human development report 1999: human development in this age of globalization. Online: http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr_1999_ch1.pdf
  67. UNDP (2000) Human development report 2000: human rights and human development. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  68. UNDP (2003) Making global trade work for people, 221. Online: http://www.undp.org/dpa/publications/globaltrade.pdf
  69. UNDP (2009) Human development report: human development index rankings. Available online http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/
  70. von Hase M (1998) The application and interpretation of the agreement on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights. In: Correa CM, Yusuf AA (eds) Intellectual property and international trade: the TRIPS agreement. Kluwer Law International, London, p 137Google Scholar
  71. Wechsler A (2011) Spotlight on China: piracy, enforcement, and the balance dilemma in intellectual property law. In: Kur A, Levin M (eds) Intellectual property rights in a fair world trade system: proposals for reform of TRIPS. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 61Google Scholar
  72. WHO (2010) Equity social determinants and public health programme. WHO, Geneva, at 7. Online: http://whqlibdoCwho.int/publications/2010/9789241563970_eng.pdf
  73. Woods JM (2003) Justiciable social rights as a critique of the liberal paradigm. Tex Int Law J 38:763Google Scholar
  74. Yu PK (2008) Access to medicines, BRICS alliances, and collective action. Am J Law Med 34:345Google Scholar

Treaties and Legislation

  1. UN Declaration on the Right to Development, UN DoC A/RES/41/128 (1986).Google Scholar
  2. African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, 21 ILM 58.Google Scholar
  3. Patents Act, 2003 (Act 657) (Ghana).Google Scholar
  4. Courts Act, 1993 (Act 459) (Ghana).Google Scholar
  5. Supreme Court Ordinance, 1876 (Ghana).Google Scholar

Jurisprudence

  1. United States – Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Appellate Body Report (WT/DS58/AB/R) 12 October 1998.Google Scholar
  2. United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, WT/DS2/AB/R 16-17 (1996).Google Scholar

Documents

  1. WIPO Development Agenda (2007).Google Scholar
  2. WIPO, Proposal by Argentina and Brazil for the Establishment of a Development Agenda for WIPO, DoCWO/GA/31/11.Google Scholar
  3. Communication from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Columbia, Cuba, Egypt, India, Nigeria, Peru, Tanzania, and Uruguay, Applicability of the Basic Principles of GATT and of Relevant International Intellectual Property Conventions (MTN.GNG/NG11/W/71).Google Scholar
  4. WHO, Equity Social Determinants and Public Health Programme (Geneva: WHO, 2010).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of LawUniversity of GhanaAccraGhana

Personalised recommendations