How IP Nitty-gritties Hinder Universal Immunisation

Since the COVID-19 immunisation started almost a year ago in January 2021, 60.2 per cent of the world population has received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine and only 9.4 per cent of people in low-income countries have received at least one dose (source: our world in data). While there are many challenges to do so, the repeated argument being ‘pharma companies should forego Intellectual Property (IP) to expedite universal immunisation’. Should pharma companies waive IP during the pandemic? Will this ensure universal immunisation and equal distribution of therapies? Let’s find out.

- Ayesha Siddiqui

The coronavirus crisis which has enraged the world has also opened up debates around IP and public health. The general debate is that waiving IP rights increases access to medicines and vaccines. The pharmaceutical industry, on the other hand, feels IP is not a hindrance but a help to contain and end COVID-19 and actually spurs innovation.

‘Proposals to temporarily waive IP protections for COVID-19 vaccines and suspend IP enforcement have met with opposition at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) because such waivers could undermine the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement, which requires WTO member countries to recognize basic protections for IP rights, and potentially return to a time when over 50 countries did not recognise patent protection for pharmaceutical products,’ said Delphine Knight Brown, Partner, Intellectual Property Practice Group, Freeborn & Peters LLP, USA.

Should Biopharma firms waive IP?

There’s a large persuasive literature regarding different licensing models, pricing, subsidization of production/consumption, technology transfer, or waiver of patents for essential medicines during pandemics.