Intellectual property and the WHO: Wither patents?

This week, from May 22 to May 27, the World Health Organisation (WHO) holds its Annual Assembly meeting in Geneva, which brings together representatives from all 192 member countries. As usual for such an august gathering, it will cover a wide variety of topics, including the controversial issue of intellectual property.

According to the official announcement, issues to be discussed include: strengthening pandemic-influenza preparedness and response, including the application of the International Health Regulations 2005; infant and young child nutrition; HIV/AIDS; polio eradication; sickle-cell anaemia; smallpox eradication and the destruction of variola virus stocks; prevention of avoidable blindness; international trade and health; tobacco control; and intellectual property rights.

Intellectual property rights might be listed last but they are likely to attract considerable attention and controversy. In preparation for the Assembly, the WHO released in April a report on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property. The report was prepared by a blue-ribbon Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Public Health, set up in 2003 and chaired by Ruth Dreyfuss, an eminent Swiss politician.

The report is quite remarkable. Contrary to the usual international fare of this type, it does not beat about the bush, and avoids bland conclusions. It addresses the highly contentious issue of patent protection for critical diseases and articulates a clear viewpoint:

“In developing countries, the fact that a patent can be obtained may contribute nothing or little to innovation if the market is too small or scientific and technological capability inadequate. In the absence of effective differential and discounted prices, patents may contribute to increasing the price of medicines needed by poor people in those countries.”

It is even more explicit in its recommendations:

“Recommendation 4.18. Companies should adopt patent and enforcement policies that facilitate greater access to medicines needed in developing countries. In low income developing countries, they should avoid filing patents, or enforcing them in ways that might inhibit access. Companies are also encouraged to grant voluntary licences in developing countries, where this will facilitate greater access to medicines, and to accompany this with technology transfer activities.”

This is not an entirely new position, but it is normally expressed by charitable organisations or by advocates of developing countries. Here it is in an official document of an international organisation in charge of world health and which, contrary to other such organisations, enjoys widespread support. It would be very interesting to see how pharmaceutical companies react to the report.