The India-U.K. FTA spells a poor deal for public health, Pg 8.

Key Highlights:

• The proposed India-U.K. FTA includes IP provisions that may exceed TRIPS requirements, affecting access to medicines.
• India’s pharmaceutical industry supplies 20% of the world’s generics, crucial for HIV, TB, and cancer treatments.
• Civil society groups demand removal of TRIPS-plus provisions, including patent term extensions and data exclusivity.
• Critics warn the FTA may threaten compulsory licensing and drug price regulation mechanisms.
• Past Indian FTAs (e.g., India-UAE CEPA) did not include TRIPS-plus terms, setting a positive precedent.
• U.K. pharmaceutical interests are reportedly pushing for stronger IP protections, which could limit India’s policy space.

Detailed Insights:

• TRIPS-plus Provisions and Public Health:
  • Patent term extensions delay generic entry beyond the standard 20 years.
  • Data exclusivity prevents generic manufacturers from using clinical trial data, delaying cheaper versions of new drugs.
• Compulsory Licensing at Risk:
  • India’s Section 84 of the Patents Act allows issuing compulsory licenses to address public health needs.
  • The FTA may undermine this flexibility, crucial for developing world medicine access.
• Impact on Indian Generic Exports:
  • Indian firms are major suppliers of low-cost ARVs for HIV/AIDS, especially to African countries.
  • Restrictions from the FTA could cause price spikes and shortages in global health programs.
• Precedents and Public Pressure:
  • Public pressure has previously led to removal of IP provisions from India-EU and India-RCEP negotiations.
  • Experts call for maintaining TRIPS-compliant but flexible IP regime to protect public health.

Concepts Involved:

• TRIPS Agreement: WTO's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights; sets minimum IP standards.
• TRIPS-plus Provisions: IP rules exceeding TRIPS standards, often included in FTAs.
• Compulsory Licensing: Government authorization for generic production of patented drugs without patent holder’s consent.