[e-drug] Novartis files a fresh case (4)

["Anant Phadke" <amol_p@vsnl.com>]

E-DRUG: Novartis files a fresh case (4)
---------------------------------------

Dear all,

I think that the Indian Patent office has rejected Novartis' application for a patent on Glivec on sound principles, entirely consistent with the country's laws and TRIPS.  The patent office opined that the patent application failed on two counts for the required criteria of patentability - it did not demonstrate an "innovative step" and it was not a "non-obvious" invention. The Patent office further felt that the application by Novartis was not consistent with section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act, which specifically states that a different structural form of a known substance cannot be patented. It is unfortunate that Novartis chose to challenge this verdict and did not respond to the 'Drop the Case' campaign in which about half a million people all over the world signed the appeal. 
Many reputed personalities publicly appealed to Novartis to withdraw the court case. They include Erik Solheim, Minister of International Development, Norway and Henry Waxman, Chairman, Congress of United States. 

In spite of such appeals, however, Novartis continued to pursue the court cases vigorously. The Chennai High Court's decision on 6th August 07 to dismiss Novartis's plea has vindicated the stand of this campaign. The Chennai Court agreed that Indian court does not have the jurisdiction to decide whether the Indian patent law is TRIPS compliant or not; the appropriate forum being the WTO Disputes Settlement Body. After this judgment, the Swiss govt. clarified that it would not take this issue to WTO Disputes Settlement Body. This too has undermined Novartis' stand. Instead of giving up, Novartis has decided to pursue with its second case to be heard by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board. We are therefore left with no choice but to launch the Boycott Novartis campaign.

Novartis claims that those patients, who cannot afford to purchase Gleevec, receive the drug free of charge, through Novartis's Gleevec International Patient Assistance Programme (GIPAP). What it does not say is that this programme is there in India because, before Novartis' patent was rejected and when it had an exclusive marketing right on the drug, the Chennai High Court had specifically asked that Novartis provide access to this drug to all those who need it and yet can not afford it. 

Further, while Novartis claims that 7500 patients get free Gleevec through GIPAP, there are an estimated 20,000 new cases of chronic myeloid leukemia every year. Dr. Purvish Parikh, professor and chief of medical oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, has filed an affidavit based on his experience, debunking Novartis's claim about GIPAP.

With Warm Regards,
Sincerely Yours,

Anant Phadke

Anant & Sandhya Phadke,
8 Ameya-Ashish Society,
Kokan Express Hotel lane,
Kothrud, Pune 4110038.
020 25460038, mobile - 9423531478