• Home
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
  • Advertise
    • Advertise On IP Watch
    • Editorial Calendar
  • Videos
  • Links
  • Help

Intellectual Property Watch

Original news and analysis on international IP policy

  • Copyright
  • Patents
  • Trademarks
  • Opinions
  • People News
  • Venues
    • Bilateral/Regional Negotiations
    • ITU/ICANN
    • United Nations – other
    • WHO
    • WIPO
    • WTO/TRIPS
    • Africa
    • Asia/Pacific
    • Europe
    • Latin America/Caribbean
    • North America
  • Themes
    • Access to Knowledge/ Open Innovation & Science
    • Food Security/ Agriculture/ Genetic Resources
    • Finance
    • Health & IP
    • Human Rights
    • Internet Governance/ Digital Economy/ Cyberspace
    • Lobbying
    • Technical Cooperation/ Technology Transfer
  • Health Policy Watch

WHO Group Agrees On New Mechanism To Fight Poor-Quality Medicines

01/11/2011 by Rachel Marusak Hermann, Intellectual Property Watch 3 Comments

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

The World Health Organization-led working group of member states on “substandard/spurious/falsely-labelled/falsified/counterfeit” (SSFFC) medical products has reached consensus on a new mechanism to prevent and control SSFFC medical products and associated activities. The creation of the new mechanism comes as the future of WHO involvement in an interagency anti-counterfeiting taskforce is in question.

The SSFFC working group met behind closed doors from 25-28 October at the WHO, reaching a late-night agreement on the last day of the meeting.

Chaired by Zambian Ambassador Darlington Mwape, the working group agreed upon a draft resolution with an annex including mechanism goals, objectives and terms of reference. The working group also produced a report on its work.

Advanced, unedited versions of the SSFFC documents are available here: SSFFC Draft Resolution [pdf], SSFFC Draft Resolution Annex (goals, objectives, TORs) [pdf], and Working Group Report [pdf]

These will be presented at the next regular World Health Assembly Executive Board meeting on 16-23 January [note: this week’s WHO Executive Board meeting is an exceptional gathering on WHO reform]. The proposal would then go to the annual World Health Assembly in May for final approval (IPW, WHO, 24 May 2011).

According to the draft resolution, the new member state mechanism on SSFFC will be open to all member states and “should include expertise in national health and medical products regulatory matters.” In general, the draft mechanism documents show an effort to broaden participation of governments in WHO activities related to this problem, with increased transparency and reporting.

The mechanism is intended to focus on public health, “excluding intellectual property and trade considerations,” according to the resolution.

Saving Definitions for Later

Not only is SSFFC difficult to say, it is also difficult to define. This is another point that the group agreed upon in their deliberations. In fact, one of the new mechanism’s objectives is “to further develop definitions of SSFFC medical products.” For now, the mechanism is directed to use the term SSFFC until the governing bodies have agreed upon a definition.

For the sake of key working definitions, the WHO defines substandard medicines as “products whose composition and ingredients do not meet the correct scientific specifications” while counterfeit medicines are “deliberately and fraudulently mislabelled with respect to identity and/or source.”

Irrespective of the terminology, SSFFC medical products are a problem that the WHO has made a priority of addressing. At the working group’s first meeting on 28 February 2011, WHO Director General Margaret Chan said in her opening remarks: “The first priority for public health, and priority for the WHO, is to protect populations from the harm caused by poor-quality, unsafe medicines. The objective is to keep these harmful products off the market everywhere, but especially in the developing world.”

A Concerted Compromise

Governments from both developing and developed countries stress that this mechanism should promote the quality, safety and efficacy of medicines rather than focus on fakes. A developed country delegate outside of the meeting said, “This is not about counterfeits, copies or fakes. This is about intentionally harmful fakes that are inefficacious, that can build virus resistance or that can be deadly.”

Although there was a clear consensus on the mission of keeping harmful medical products off the market, questions were raised on how best to address the problem. According to sources, one of the main questions was how and to what extent the new mechanism should address issues related to access and availability of medicines.

A delegate from a least developed country said, “It is important to look at the whole picture and not just part of it. The problem of access and affordability of medicines in countries leaves a vacuum. And it’s because of this vacuum that we have the problem of SSFFC.”

The debate did not fall along clear developing/developed country lines. During the last day of the meeting, the African Group submitted a proposal [pdf] of six objectives that did not include issues related to medicine access or availability. One delegate explained that there are other avenues available to improving access to medicines and that this mechanism is meant to assure quality, safe and efficacious medicines and to protect people from the risks of SSFFC.

In the end, both access and availability were included in the working group’s draft resolution. The mechanism’s goal is in part “to protect public health and promote access to affordable, safe, efficacious and quality medical products.” One of the objectives calls for strong collaboration between the new mechanism and “the work of other areas of WHO that address access to quality, safe, efficacious and affordable medical products.”

IMPACT’s Uncertain Future

Outlined in the agenda, the SSFFC working group also addressed the WHO’s relationship with the International Medical Products Anti-Counterfeiting Taskforce (IMPACT). The WHO launched the taskforce in February 2006 in response to the increasing public health problem of counterfeit medicines. According to IMPACT’s website, IMPACT is a partnership of all of the “major anti-counterfeiting players” tasked to “halt the production, trading and selling of fake medicines around the globe.” IMPACT includes the international police agency Interpol, among other organisations.

The taskforce has incurred criticism from a number of stakeholders including the non-governmental Third World Network, Affordable Medicines for Africa, and OXFAM. At the outset of the meeting, over 50 NGOs issued an open letter [pdf] to the SSFFC chair, calling for the WHO to disassociate itself from IMPACT. The letter raised a number of concerns including “the role played by the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) in IMPACT’s activities, the lack of transparency surrounding IMPACT’s activities, and lack of accountability as IMPACT has operated outside the purview of WHO member states.” It also took issue with the taskforce’s role in matters related to anti-counterfeiting and IP enforcement.

Although the SSFFC reviewed the WHO’s current and future relationship with IMPACT, no decisions were made. According to the meeting report, “There were divergent views expressed with regard to WHO’s involvement in the Taskforce” and that “a way forward on this specific issue could emerge when the new mechanism is considered.”

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Related

Rachel Marusak Hermann may be reached at info@ip-watch.org.

Creative Commons License"WHO Group Agrees On New Mechanism To Fight Poor-Quality Medicines" by Intellectual Property Watch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Filed Under: IP Policies, Language, Subscribers, Themes, Venues, Access to Knowledge/ Education, Copyright Policy, Development, Enforcement, English, Health & IP, Innovation/ R&D, Patents/Designs/Trade Secrets, Technical Cooperation/ Technology Transfer, Trademarks/Geographical Indications/Domains, WHO

Trackbacks

  1. WHO Board Considers Reform, Director Re-Election, Key IP-Related Issues | Intellectual Property Watch says:
    16/01/2012 at 7:06 pm

    […] Chan did not directly mention the issue of counterfeit and substandard medical products by name, perhaps because of the difficulty in finding acceptable words by which to refer to it. The issue of “substandard/spurious/falsely-labelled/falsified/counterfeit medical products” – as it has been dubbed by member states in an effort to appease all sides – has been controversial at WHO in recent years. But members managed to agree in October on a new mechanism for addressing the issue (IPW, WHO, 1 November 2011). […]

    Reply
  2. World Health Assembly: Members Gavel New Mechanism To Fight Poor-Quality Medicines | Intellectual Property Watch says:
    18/05/2014 at 12:16 pm

    […] The issues raised during the assembly meeting closely reflected the debate that occurred during the SSFFC working group’s meeting, which was held in Geneva last October (IPW, Public Health, 1 November 2012). […]

    Reply
  3. Full Agenda For WHO: Reform, R&D Convention, Substandard Medicines, NCDs, Pandemics says:
    18/01/2015 at 6:51 pm

    […] A high-profile decision on the table is the adoption of a resolution on poor quality medicines. After convening in Geneva on 25-28 October, the working group on Substandard/Spurious/ Falsely-Labelled/Falsified/Counterfeit Medical Products (SSFFC) proposed the establishment of a new WHO mechanism to fight substandard medicines. The group’s recommendations were transmitted, considered and adopted by the Executive Board at its 130th session in January 2012 (IPW, WHO, 11 January 2012). […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Vimeo
My Tweets

IPW News Briefs

Saudis Seek Alternative Energy Partners Through WIPO Green Program

Chinese IP Officials Complete Study Of UK, European IP Law

Perspectives on the US

In US, No Remedies For Growing IP Infringements

US IP Law – Big Developments On The Horizon In 2019

More perspectives on the US...

Supported Series: Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities

Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities Series – Translations Now Available

The Myth Of IP Incentives For All Nations – Q&A With Carlos Correa

Read the TRIPS flexibilities series...

Paid Content

Interview With Peter Vanderheyden, CEO Of Article One Partners

More paid content...

IP Delegates in Geneva

  • IP Delegates in Geneva
  • Guide to Geneva-based Public Health and IP Organisations

All Story Categories

Other Languages

  • Français
  • Español
  • 中文
  • اللغة العربية

Archives

  • Archives
  • Monthly Reporter

Staff Access

  • Writers

Sign up for free news alerts

This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2021 · Global Policy Reporting

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.