1 / 14

ECUO's efforts in avoiding TRIPS + in Eastern Europe and Central Asia ECUO 23 July, 2014

ECUO's efforts in avoiding TRIPS + in Eastern Europe and Central Asia ECUO 23 July, 2014 Melbourne Australia Alexandra Volgina and Tetyana Pinska East Europe and Central Asia Union of PLWH (ECUO). Background. Anti-Retroviral (ARV) treatment coverage EECA region-wide is low at 25%.

gianna
Download Presentation

ECUO's efforts in avoiding TRIPS + in Eastern Europe and Central Asia ECUO 23 July, 2014

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ECUO's efforts in avoiding TRIPS + in Eastern Europe and Central Asia ECUO 23 July, 2014 Melbourne Australia Alexandra Volgina and TetyanaPinska East Europe and Central Asia Union of PLWH (ECUO)

  2. Background • Anti-Retroviral (ARV) treatment coverage EECA region-wide is low at 25%. • Countries are characterized by low commitment to national funding, dependence on Global Fund (GF) funding, high ARVs cost (especially 2nd and 3rd-line regimens), difference in quality between ARVs in national programs and GF programs. • On the threshold of signing Association agreement between the European Union and Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, thread of access to medicines restriction became evident. Embedded in Association, Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) introduced Intellectual Property (IP) protection and enforcement at a breadth never before seen at multilateral level. In 2013 ECUO launched AIDSFonds-funded project1 in Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus to address emerging challenge.

  3. What was done • ECUO conducted educational trainings and technical support for both civil society organizations and state structures in Belarus, Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine and managed to attract high attention of the national parliaments and state authorities to the TRIPS issue.

  4. What was done • ECUO prepared the analytic report “Implementation of TRIPS-flexibilities to improve access to medicines in Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine”. Report is available at http://ecuo.org/en/ecuo/news/2013/08/01/analytic-report-implementation-trips-flexibilities-improve-access-medicines-belarus-georgia-moldova-and-ukraine/ • ECUO initiated and constantly supports the negotiations between civil society organizations and state authorities to avoid implementation of TRIPS+ regimens.

  5. Advocacy campaign Appeals from NGOs on issues of IP were sent to: • Moldova Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs and European Integration, Head of the State Agency on Intellectual Property of the Republic of Moldova, Ministry of Health; • Georgia - Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Health, Labour and Social Welfare. • Ukraine, "Ukrainian Network of PLWH" with the support of other organizations, sent an appeal to the President of Ukraine, the Prime Minister, Secretary of the National Security and Defense of Ukraine, Head of the Health Committee of the VerkhovnaRada, the Minister of Foreign Affairs. As a result of complaints initiated dialogue with government representatives

  6. Link between activities at National and International level • In addition to the activities at the country level, ECUO at the regional level with the support of ITPC-ru www.itpcru.org and EHRN www.harm-reduction.org and EECA СAB www.eeca-cab.org/ru sent appeal to the President of the European Parliament, and heads of relevant committees of the European Parliament (Committee on human Rights, Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament, Committee on Foreign Affairs of the European Parliament)

  7. Target groups • People who make decisions, stakeholders, structures at the national level (Parliaments, Ministries of Health and Social Development, other relevant Ministries of the countries) • NGOs working on national, regional, international levels – able to influence politics in HIV treatment sphere, • International organizations and committees • Mass media covering health, social policy, human rights issues on national, regional, international level • PLWHA community - TRIPS issue is hard for understanding and working with, – ECUO have provided experts and education, which helped PLWHA community within their countries to held negotiations with such structures as intellectual property and patent departments

  8. Results • PLWHA community within their countries was prepared to held negotiations with such structures as intellectual property and patent departments • The attention of structures was attracted, allies were found (for example Parliament in Georgia supported the appeal of patients to President and Ministries). The level needed to start negotiations was reached. HOWEVER

  9. Challenges • All the time we were late – it seems we were trying to catch a train already running away – increasing level of understanding of professionals when it was time for already aggressive advocacy and etc. • Within the countries: the political situation was changing – we were actually to stop the campaign in Ukraine - could be regarded as opposition to European integration. In other countries – as the political situation was changing, time remaining shortened it was becoming increasingly difficultto advocate. • Outside: we were not ready for full-scale advocacy at European level, low level of interaction with partners at the European level, a poor understanding of European structures and mechanisms. in the end - the train left

  10. Comparative table of of TRIPS-plus provisions contained in Association Agreements of the European Union (EU) with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine - 1

  11. Comparative table of of TRIPS-plus provisions contained in Association Agreements of the European Union (EU) with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – 2

  12. Comparative table of of TRIPS-plus provisions contained in Association Agreements of the European Union (EU) with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – 3

  13. What is now • Still some chance for Ukraine – political situation is on our side if we will try to work with EU • Lessons have to be learned – good communication with partners, close cooperation – we need to ask for help very loudly • Opportunities have to be used( Italian Conference on HIV and etc.) • Allies have to be found inside countries – agrarian political parties and etc., outside – student movements – we do need help • mitigate the consequences of TRIPS within the countries: • Advocate for regional / international procurement mechanism • Advocate change legislation in the area of registration - the use of unregistered medicines • Advocate delay in the beginning of use of the TRIPS+ (5-10 years)

  14. Thank you! www.ecuo.org

More Related