The undersigned organizations and people, wish to support the debate about intellectual property and access to medication with the following thoughts, to serve as a basis for reasonable and fair decision making, taking into consideration the realities and needs of the populations infected and affected by HIV/AIDS and other epidemics in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Latin American and Caribbean States have endorsed and signed treaties, agreements, pacts and international statements where they take on the obligation of guaranteeing its citizen’s human rights, including people living with HIV/AIDS. In 2001, governments from these countries signed the Declaration of Commitments in the fight against HIV/AIDS during the Special Session of the United Nations’ General Assembly about HIV/AIDS (UNGASS), committing itself to wholly comply with the action outlines included in the text of the aforementioned declaration.

In the issue about intellectual property and medications, we consider that:

1. Scientific research has developed drugs that have contributed to health improvement and quality of life.

2. We are aware of the costs and time that these researches take.

3. Understanding the interests of the business sector to protect intellectual property rights, we pause to highlight the following items that serve as the basis of debate:

A) The income and economic levels are not the same for the countries in different geographical regions. Therefore, great difference between Canada and the United States can be seen when compared to the rest of the countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, and this great difference deserves a different treatment when applying policies related to access to medication and the effect of prices.

B) There is no doubt that the use of patents in public health is of significant effect, granting the owner of such patent a monopoly. International pharmaceutical companies have misused this, when they impose prices on essential medication as they please, thus playing with the lives of millions of people worldwide. This can be evidenced as with the case of Mefloquina (anti-malaria) in Tanzania, where it cost double what it cost in Norway, or the case of Coprofloxacin 100 units (BAYER) in Mozambique it costs 740 Dollars and in India, thanks to the competition by Generics, it costs 15 Dollars, 49 times more expensive.

C) Generic Antiretrovirals have made possible the reduction in prices of those produced by brand name pharmaceuticals. A reduction from 10,000 Dollars a year to 360 Dollars a year per person was achieved with quality generic medication pre-qualified by the WHO. This means that with the same money used to save one person’s life, now 27 more people can benefit. A very significant proportion compared to a 64% reduction, which allows more people to access health systems and people to get their medication through the private system.

D) Thanks to the exceptions or safeguards in the Intellectual Property Agreements related to Trade- IPAT- Brazil achieved an 82% reduction in ARV prices between 1997 and 2001, avoiding 234,000 hospitalizations and an savings of 677 million Dollars, a reduction in casualty rates, reduction in opportunistic infections related to Aids (Cytomegalovirus, Crytococcosis and Kaposi Sarcoma) and a reduction of more than 75% in tuberculosis.

E) To reduce and/or establish subtle barriers to the exceptions or safeguards of the IPAT means to affect the response capabilities in case of emergencies and health crisis in Latin American and Caribbean countries, which are seriously affected by some of the most catastrophic, costly, and currently difficult to manage diseases such as HIV/AIDS, dengue, tuberculosis, leishmaniasis, trachoma or chagas.

F) We are facing conflict of interests and protected rights: In one hand we have rights and economic interests from the companies that invest time, effort and money for scientific research and that need the patent’s monopoly to compensate costs and make a profit, and on the other hand, we have the right to health and life of the people located in countries with low economic possibilities of satisfying these needs. When facing these conflict of interest and protected rights, the right to health and life must prevail above any business interest.

G) Experience has shown us that patent offices in Latin America and the Caribbean don’t have the capacity and/or the will to correct situations deserving a patent to be revoked. It is clear that the lack of reaction shows that said systems have faults in their development, meanwhile in the United States and Europe patent reviews are relatively frequent (and its subsequent cancellation), this doesn’t happen in Latin American or Caribbean countries. Therefore patents for medications such as the one granted to Glaxo Smith Kline’s “Combivir” remain, this one has not been revoked despite the presence of a juxtaposition of two medications previously patented, therefore extending monopoly benefits and preventing several countries the access to lower cost generic drugs.

H) We think that Latin American and Caribbean countries, can’t nor should, sign any trade treaties that contradicts or sets limits to the achievements reached in the DECLARATION RELATING TO THE IPAT AND PUBLIC HEALTH proclaimed during the Ministry Conference Fourth Period of sessions in Doha, November 9 – 14, 2001, “Doha Declaration”.

I) In the context of the FTAA, we denounce and oppose the policy of undermining the negotiating capabilities of the countries in the region through bilateral agreements and previous sub-regions, in which the human rights of the communities are violated when IPAT PLUS clauses are established, these clauses impose serious restrictions to the production and sale of generic drugs, such as in the case of the Trade agreement between Chile and the United States, CAFTA and other negotiations that are being developed at this time. In the case of CAFTA, which has yet to be ratified, we ask the governments involved to not accept the imposition of test data protection for five years, since by doing so, it would be sentencing to death millions of people in Central America.

Because of the aforementioned, we exhort countries, through the Government Representatives for the Participation of the Civil Society Committee, so that in bilateral or multilateral trade agreements which include intellectual property issues, the following be kept in mind:

1. The need to impose further limits to the exceptions or safeguards included in the IPAT. On the contrary, we are asking for clarification statement that none of the countries will suffer consequences or harassment when using these safeguards to remedy national emergency situations according to what was established in the Doha Declaration.

2. That the health issue cannot be relegated when faced with trade agreements and therefore these cannot stop the Member States of any treaty from protecting public health, in accordance with paragraph fourth of the Doha Declaration.

3. That organizations involved in the health issue of the Latin American and Caribbean countries, request the signing of a commitment act on behalf of the States participating in the FTAA and in any bilateral or sub-regional agreement, where the right to life and health prevails over any business right is guaranteed.

4. That as a result of an effective spirit of the participation of the civil society, trade agreements signed between Chile and the United States, between Central America and the United States and any other trade treaty, be reviewed in light of the Doha Declaration principles and of the different Declarations and Treaties regarding Human Rights signed and ratified by participating states in these agreements.

5. We propose the immediate creation of a committee under the supervision of the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), an entity in charge of the health of the American countries, and with the effective participation of the social groups that work in the health field, for the review of the trade agreements previously mentioned and any other trade agreement that threatens or obstructs access to essential health services, including the access to medication. This committee must have the authority to suggest that those trade agreements that limit or obstruct the effective access to health be revoked.