In an insightful op-ed titled
‘Time to Challenge TRIPs plus IPRs’ and carried by the ET a couple of days ago,
Mr. Prashant Goyal, Director, Trade Policy Division, Department of Commerce, Ministry of Industry and Commerce, Government of India has aired his ‘personal views’ on the topic of ‘TRIP plus’ protection that is being advocated through ACTA and FTAs, as also the efforts of IMPACT & WHO. It is rare for senior Indian bureaucrats to be so candid about their views. It is even rarer for them to write such insightful and nuanced op-eds on the challenges faced by India in international forums on intellectual property laws. In particular his observation on the implications of FTAs and the ‘Most Favoured Nation’ status of TRIPs is extremely pertinent in the context of the recent FTAs that India wishes to finalize. He points out how any concessions in an FTA apply not only to the signatories but to all member-states of the WTO who have been classified as MFNs by India. Therefore although we may have only a limited gain from one country, the rest of the world gains from us. The most surprising factor about this op-ed is its timing. Talks on the Indo-E.U. FTAs are at a crucial stage with both countries hoping to seal the deal by October, 2010. The most controversial aspect of this FTA is the data-exclusivity provision for pharmaceuticals that the E.U. is most insistent on. In his op-ed Mr. Goyal, classifies such a requirement, in the context of Latin-E.U. FTAs as TRIP plus. Given that the Trade Policy Division is in charge of formulating India’s trade policy and is most probably in charge of negotiating the Indo-E.U. FTA it is probably safe to conclude that the Govt. Of India will at no cost go ahead with the ‘data exclusivity’ requirement of the Europeans.
Things however appear to be slightly more complicated than they first appeared. This report by Joe Matthew of BS hints at a turf war within the Ministry of Commerce. Apparently the Department of Commerce wants to setup an inter-ministerial mechanism to co-ordinate all IP negotiations at an international level. This is very necessary because topics like data exclusivity actually fall within the ambit of the Ministry of Health for the simple reason that the Drugs & Cosmetics Act falls within the purview of this Ministry. According to Joe, this suggestion of an inter-ministerial committee to co-ordinate IP issues has not gone down too well with the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), which is the Department in charge of formulating Indian IP laws, with the exception of copyright laws. Apparently the DIPP is warning the Department of Commerce that it should not go for any TRIPs plus commitments. Given the content and tenor of Mr. Goyal’s (Department of Commerce) op-ed I think it would be safe to say that both Departments are on the same page unless and of course there have been some developments that have not been reported in the press.
In either case the next few months are going to prove extremely interesting. Hopefully we will have more bureaucrats coming forth with their views. Such a public debate is healthy in formulating policy. The current closed door negotiations of the Indo-E.U. FTAs is not good for Indian democracy.
