The Confederation of Indian Industry (CII)'s association with US India Business Council (USIBC) in organizing a Round Table in Delhi on 'Compulsory Licensing' has come in for severe criticism from the public interest groups and experts as they argue that the USIBC has been a vocal opponent of the health safeguards in India's patent law.
The joint roundtable with USIBC once again raises questions and concerns about whether CII continues to represent Indian industry and stakeholder interests, experts say.
CII has co-hosted with USIBS a round table in New Delhi on September 23 on the critically important issue of compulsory licensing for the purpose of soliciting views from Indian industry. A delegation from USA led by Dr Romi Singh, executive director, global regulatory affairs and safety, Amgen, Inc. USA has attended the roundtable. The roundtable was organised in the wake of a discussion paper on Compulsory Licensing, issued by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), Ministry of Commerce, giving the information on various aspects of Compulsory Licensing keeping focus on pharma industry and also requesting feedback from the key stakeholders of the industry.
Taking strong exception to the CII's partnering with USIBC, public interest groups and experts say that USIBC's Coalition for Healthy India (CHI) will continue to promote advancement, quality control and IP Protection in this essential industry, and will remain vigilant against any back-sliding by India towards compulsory licensing.
This objective is stated even more clearly in the objectives of CHI, "USIBC is concerned that a populist trend is taking hold in other countries towards compulsory licensing of pharmaceuticals -essentially expropriating intellectual property - that will rob these countries of access to the latest innovations in drugs and treatment programmes, leaving the citizens of these countries with poor access to out-dated pharmaceuticals and treatment programs. We do not want to see this retrograde trend adversely affecting India's healthcare system."
The sponsors of USIBC's CHI include most of the big multinational pharmaceutical companies - Pfizer, Merck, Johnson and Johnson, Abbott Laboratories, Novartis, sanofi-aventis and Eli Lilly. The Indian arms of some of these companies recently approached the Indian Prime Minister's Office to push for amendments for Section 3(d), data exclusivity and patent linkages. Ranbaxy Ltd, which is no longer an Indian generic company but is a Japanese company, is also among the sponsors, experts say.
In 2009, USIBC had announced the launch of its report against Section 3(d) in the US at a meeting to which it invited Minister of Commerce and Industry, Anand Sharma. Sharma, on that visit to the US, had made it clear that India's role as a supplier of generic medicines in India and across the developing world was a matter of pride for India and that Indian generics have made medicines affordable.
CII's deep involvement with USIBC is reflected in the "exclusive partnership between USIBC and CII in the form of a joint CII-USIBC Healthcare Task Force" under the banner of the Coalition for a Healthy India.
CII has repeatedly courted controversy on the issue of intellectual property and public interest, particularly on access to medicines and access to knowledge. In particular, several groups had protested to CII's repeated partnering with the George Washington University's India project.