By Henry Zakumumpa

Over one hundred human rights NGOs, including some from Uganda, have petitioned the US government to stop a three-day Intellectual property summit set to take place in Cape Town, South Africa in April 2012.

The summit has been called to discuss intellectual property enforcement on the continent and could be a critical meeting.

Campaigners say enforcing trade related intellectual property rights (TRIPS) translates into banning Indian generic AIDS drugs by enforcing patents for Western pharmaceutical giants, outlawing extensive photocopying of educational materials published by Western multinationals, limiting access to newly developed disease-resistant agricultural seeds for poor farmers and cracking down on counterfeit Microsoft computer programmes, meaning millions of poor Africans will miss out.

TRIPS refers to the exclusive rights held by inventors and innovators of items such as new drugs, books, plant seeds, software developers. These rights are enforced by international law and unlawful access to them attracts penalties. The majority of intellectual property rights are owned by western countries.

The Cape Town summit, Africa Intellectual Property Forum: Intellectual Property, Regional Integration and Economic Growth in Africa is organised by the US Department of Commerce.

It has been billed as the first Africa-wide ministerial-level event of its kind. The summit is jointly organized by World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) and several US multinational companies including PfIzer, Dolby,Caterpillar and Microsoft.

The summit has drawn the ire of human rights NGOs in Africa. This is partly due to the disturbing conflict of interesting which the summit’s sponsors – namely US multinationals, in collaboration with Western governments such as the US, France and Japan – are the organizations that own the majority of intellectual property and thereby have a vested interest in enforcing intellectual property rights in African countries despite the fact that the majority of Africans live on less than a dollar a day.

Mulumba Moses of the Center for Health, Human Rights and Development, a Ugandan human rights NGO, said: ”It’s a shame that the Africa IP Forum is putting emphasis on IP enforcement agenda. One would expect the continent to be discussing the development agenda in light of its social economic challenges in the areas of health, education and agriculture. Over emphasis on IP enforcement is iniquitous of the continent’s population that still badly needs to utilise the policy space provided for by the TRIPS Agreement.”

The summit is being castigated by human rights activists because it appears to reverse gains made by African governments in securing exemptions from enforcing the intellectual property rights of multinationals in poor countries. One such gain was the 2006 TRIPS agreement in Doha, which granted poor countries a grace period until 2016 to consume cheap generic AIDS drugs manufactured in India.

It is feared that the summit may trigger new intellectual property legislation in African countries in a compliance move that may curtail access to products, in some cases life-saving drugs such as AIDS or tuberculosis medication.

The irony of the South African government playing host to a summit on African soil which is seeking to perpetuate Western multinational interests by curtailing access to life-saving drugs or educational materials to poor African students is not lost on African and global human rights NGOs.

The sentiments of the petitioning African NGOs are aptly captured by Sangeeta Shasikant, Legal Advisor of the Third World Network: “The US is well known for pressuring developing countries to adopt TRIPS plus standards. The Africa IP Summit is another attempt by the US to advance its aggressive agenda on IP protection and enforcement such as Anti-Counterfeit Agreement (ACTA), which favours the interests of certain powerful multinational companies.

“The US concept paper and programme totally disregards the numerous developmental and socio-economic challenges facing Africa. Issues of access to affordable medicines, access to knowledge, misappropriation of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge and farmers’ rights are totally disregarded.”

Source: http://www.keycorrespondents.org/2012/02/24/outcry-from-african-ngos-over-cape-town-intellectual-property-summit/

by williams moi

Pregnant women in Pallisa district in Eastern Uganda are reported to be delivering under trees due to the collapse of a building at the local health facility.

Due to inadequate space in Ngwere Health Centre III in Petete Sub County, health workers have created a makeshift shelter under trees near the centre for women to deliver in.

Reports indicate that Ngwere Health Centre III, which serves the entire sub county of more than 15,000 people plus its neighbors, has only two rooms after one of the centre’s buildings collapsed due to strong wind and heavy rain last year.

The facility, which is located about 15km from Pallisa town, is over crowded meaning patients are at risk of contracting infectious diseases during labor.

A health worker at the government aided facility described as “inhuman” the situation in which staff are forced to handle labors in the makeshift shelter due to a lack of space, adding that a quick intervention is required to rectify the situation.

“We have no alternative but to perform our duty in order to save the lives of these mothers as we wait for government response so as to rehabilitate the facility fully,” another medical worker said on condition of anonymity.

In Uganda it’s only the chief administrative officer or the medical superintendant who has the mandate to speak to the press about health matters but they are not always available. However, one nursing officers Ahmed Mpande agreed to be named as he said  the collapsed building had become a major problem facing maternal health in Pallisa district. He added that the building’s collapse had been reported to the authorities but they had declined to respond.

Mpande says that other services including antenatal care, deliveries, laboratory and drug storage are all handled in the two rooms. Mpande also notes that, due to the poor working environment, the health facility is due to temporarily close until it is renovated.

Community resource person, Kulu Nalongo, says the centre serves a radius of 6km but regardless of its sorry state, the community still has hope over it though it’s not renovated.

When contacted, CAO Pallisa district Mbooge Isa confirms receipt of a letter sent in July last year (2011) drawing attention to the fact that the health unit requires immediate renovation.

Mbooge said Pallisa district has received funds from the poverty reduction program (PRDP) and expects to use part of the money to rehabilitate the health unit this financial year (2012/2013). But he did not mention when the work would begin.

However, Chairman of LC 5 Pallisa says that the district has no capacity to renovate the structure because it has no emergency funds.

“It is true this health unit is damaged but we have to budget for it next financial year since the district is in a planning cycle,” he added.

Nagwere health centre was run by NGO the Christian Children Fund in 1980 before the government took over in 2009.

Source: http://www.keycorrespondents.org/2012/02/22/pallisa-mothers-deliver-under-trees-due-to-collapse-of-health-centre/

By Cathy Norton

Eating a healthy, balanced diet is important for both the mother and baby during pregnancy. Here are ten foods that pregnant mothers should eat to ensure that they get all the nutrients necessary for a healthy pregnancy.

1. Eggs – Eggs contain a lot of protein, which help the baby’s cells develop. They also contain twelve vitamins and minerals, including choline, which helps with the baby’s brain development.

2. Salmon – Salmon is another food that contains quality proteins that are good for fetal development. This food also has a significant amount of omega-3 fatty acids, which are good for the baby’s brain and vision. While it’s not good to eat other types of fish during pregnancy due to their high mercury content, salmon has lower amounts that are safe for pregnant mothers. Still, they should only eat salmon once a week at the most.

3. Beans – Beans are one of the healthiest foods, since they are full of vitamins and minerals, but also protein and fiber. Fiber is important for pregnant women because it helps with digestion, which can slow down during pregnancy and cause constipation or hemorrhoids.

4. Sweet potatoes – The orange color in sweet potatoes comes from carotenoids, which convert to vitamin A once eaten. Vitamin A is essential for vision development in a baby. Sweet potatoes also have vitamin C, for the immune system, folate, which helps form DNA and RNA, and fiber for the digestive system.

5. Whole grains – Whole grains are high in fiber, vitamin E, and selenium, which helps the immune system function and will help your baby stay healthy in the womb. Whole grains come from a variety of sources, such as whole wheat flour and bread, but also brown rice, oats, barley, rye, and quinoa.

6. Nuts – Nuts are another great source of omega-3 fatty acids and other healthy fats, which help with brain development. Walnuts have the highest amount of omega-3s, but beechnuts, hickory nuts, pecans, pine nuts, and almonds are also good for pregnancy.

7. Green leafy vegetables – Leafy vegetables such as spinach, kale, and Swiss chard have lots of nutrients. These include vitamin A, for vision, vitamin C, for the immune system, and vitamin K, for blood clotting.

8. Lean Meats – Lean meats with lower fat contentsare a great source of protein for both mother and baby. Whether poultry, pork, or red meat, it’s best to eat meat that has most of the fat cut off.

9. Yogurt – In addition to the protein found in yogurt, it also has a high calcium content. This will help your baby’s bones grow as well as keep yours strong and healthy.

10. Berries – Berries are a sweet treat that are easy to eat when a pregnant mom is suffering from nausea. They are also loaded with antioxidants and vitamin C, which helps the body absorb iron and assists in cell formation.

Global Trends
By MARTIN KHOR
A South Centre conference last week warned that developing countries could be badly hit by the new global downturn, and also discussed the state of WTO negotiations.
THE global economic downturn and the international negotiations on trade and climate change were the topics of a South Centre conference last week.

It provided an interesting discussion on the state of the world from the perspective of developing countries at the start of this year.

The conference, attended by over a hundred policy makers, diplomats and experts, was held on Feb 2-3 at the United Nations building in Geneva.

In a session on instability and downturn in the world economy, the South Centre’s chief economist Dr Yilmaz Akyuz warned that the South’s concept of decoupling its growth from the developed economies could lead to complacency.

While in the past decade the growth rates of developing countries stood at about 5 percentage points higher than those of developed countries, this was largely due to favourable external conditions that are no longer sustainable.

Among the conditions were the US acting as locomotive to export-dependent developing countries, a surge in private capital flows to developing countries and massive rises in commodity prices as well remittances to developing countries.

As these factors fade, or even reverse in the current global downturn, developing countries have to deal with emerging problems while devising longer term development strategies such as reducing dependence on Western markets and finance and upgrading investment (for those which are under-investing) or consumption (for those which are under-consuming) and boosting industry.

International Labour Organisation director-general Juan Somavia urged developing countries to safeguard their space to implement their own policies and to use this space well in this period of crisis.

He advocated switching to a growth pattern that is job-intensive and income-led.

Growth should be designed to generate jobs and raise wages, increase social protection and put a higher value to work.

Charles Soludo, former Central Bank governor of Nigeria, warned that the downturn would force many developing countries into a new debt crisis.

This time, there was little hope of external help. And in Africa, the situation may be worsened by the economic partnership agreements being foisted by the European Union that would further constrain Africa’s policy space.

Nagesh Kumar, chief economist of Escap (the UN commission for Asia), said the downturn would affect Asia through the trade and finance channels, warning that many of the remedies used in the 2009 crisis were no longer available.

Malaysian economist Lim Mah Hui analysed three major imbalances (including income inequality) and stressed the role of the state in industrial policy and to regulate finance to serve the real economy instead of speculation.

The conference discussed the impasse in the Doha Round and the future of the World Trade Organisation.

A panel of ambassadors from China, India, Nigeria, Tanzania, Bangladesh, Bolivia, and South Africa seemed to have similar opinions.

They agreed that the Doha Round impasse would continue for some time.

While attempts are made to revive the Round, developing countries should resist attempts by developed countries to introduce new issues such as investment, new plurilateral agreements inside WTO, or to re-examine the status of developing countries.

Meanwhile, the members should make WTO more development-centred by resolving issues of interest to least developed countries by improving special and differential treatment for developing countries and tackling agricultural protection in developed countries.

Rubens Ricupero, former Unctad secretary general, recalled his warning a decade ago that the Doha Round was one Round too many and too early, as WTO members should have focused instead on digesting the Uruguay Round and its unfinished business.

WTO would survive as it had a useful role. It should focus on the unfinished business of agriculture, tariff peaks, anti-dumping and issues that would link trade and development.

Trade expert Chakravarthi Raghavan said the Doha Round was introduced by developed countries to evade their commitment made during the Uruguay Round to cut their agriculture subsidies and tariffs.

The Doha negotiating agenda had been loaded with so many other issues and now could not be completed, thus allowing developed countries not to undertake their agriculture commitments.

This was bad faith on their part and developing countries should respond, for example, by not implementing the intellectual property agreement.

The conference ended with a session discussing the current climate change negotiations.

A panel of experts and negotiators analysed the process and outcome of the Durban climate conference and made suggestions on how developing countries should interpret the mandate for new negotiations so that the equity principle and concerns of developing countries could be successfully addressed.

source:http://thestar.com.my/columnists/story.asp?col=globaltrends&file=/2012/2/6/columnists/globaltrends/10684367&sec=Global%20Trends

What is the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)?

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a secretive, multi-nation trade agreement that threatens to extend restrictive intellectual property laws across the globe.

The nine nations currently negotiating the TPP are the U.S., Australia, Peru, Malaysia, Vietnam, New Zealand, Chile, Singapore, and Brunei Darussalam. Expected to be finalized in November 2011, the TPP will contain a chapter on Intellectual Property (copyright, trademarks, patents and perhaps geographical indications) that will have a broad impact on citizens’ rights, the future of the Internet’s global infrastructure, and innovation across the world. A leaked version of the February 2011 draft U.S. TPP Intellectual Property Rights Chapter indicates that U.S. negotiators are pushing for the adoption of copyright measures far more restrictive than currently required by international treaties, including the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement.

The TPP will rewrite the global rules on IP enforcement. All signatory countries will be required to conform their domestic laws and policies to the provisions of the Agreement. In the U.S. this is likely to further entrench controversial aspects of U.S. copyright law (such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s broad ban on circumventing digital locks and frequently disproprotionate statutory damages for copyright infringement) and restrict the ability of Congress to engage in domestic law reform to meet the evolving IP needs of American citizens and the innovative technology sector. The recently leaked U.S. IP chapter also includes provisions that appear to go beyond current U.S. law. This raises significant concerns for citizens’ due process, privacy and freedom of expression rights.

The leaked U.S. IP chapter includes many detailed requirements that are more restrictive than current international standards, and would require significant changes to other countries’ copyright laws. These include obligations for countries to:

Treat temporary reproductions of copyrighted works without copyright holders’ authorization as copyright infringement. This was discussed but rejected at the intergovernmental diplomatic conference that created two key 1996 international copyright treaties, the WIPO Copyright Treaty and WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty.
Ban parallel importation of genuine goods acquired from other countries without the authorization of copyright owners.

Create copyright terms well beyond the internationally agreed period in the 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of IP. Life + 70 years for works created by individuals, and following the U.S.- Oman Free Trade Agreement, either 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation for corporate owned works (such as Mickey Mouse).

Adopt laws banning circumvention of digital locks (technological protection measures or TPMs) that mirror the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and treat violation of the TPM provisions as a separate offence, even when no copyright infringement is involved. This would require countries like New Zealand to completely rewrite its innovative 2008 copyright law. It would also override Australia’s carefully-crafted 2007 technological protection measure regime exclusions for region-coding on movies on DVDs, videogames, and players, and for embedded software in devices that restrict access to goods and services for the device — a thoughtful effort by Australian policy makers to avoid the pitfalls experienced with the U.S. digital locks provisions. In the U.S., business competitors have used the DMCA to try to block printer cartridge refill services, competing garage door openers, and to lock mobile phones to particular network providers.
Adopt criminal sanctions for copyright infringement that is done without a commercial motivation, based on the provisions of the 1997 U.S. No Electronic Theft Act.

Adopt the U.S. DMCA Internet Intermediaries copyright safe harbor regime in its entirety. This would require Chile to rewrite its forward-looking 2010 copyright law that currently provides for a judicial notice and takedown regime, which provides greater protection to Internet users’ expression and privacy than the DMCA’s copyright safe harbor regime.

In short, countries would have to abandon any efforts to learn from the mistakes of the U.S. experience over the last 12 years, and adopt many of the most controversial aspects of U.S. copyright law in their entirety. At the same time, the U.S. IP chapter does not export the limitations and exceptions in the U.S. copyright regime like fair use, which have enabled freedom of expression and technological innovation to flourish in the U.S. It includes only a placeholder for exceptions and limitations. This raises serious concerns about other countries’ sovereignty and the ability of national governments to set laws and policies to meet their domestic priorities.

Non-Transparent and On The Fast Track

Despite the broad scope and far-reaching implications of the TPP, negotiations for the agreement have taken place behind closed doors and outside of the checks and balances that operate at traditional multilateral treaty-making organizations such as the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization.

Like ACTA, the TPP is being negotiated rapidly with little transparency. Since 2009 when United States Trade Representative Ron Kirk notified the U.S. Congress that President Obama intended to begin talks on TPP, there have been five formal rounds of TPP negotiations in Melbourne, Australia (March 2010), San Francisco, USA (June, 2010), Brunei (October 2010), Auckland, New Zealand (December 2010), and Santiago, Chile (February 2011). The negotiating countries hope to complete the TPP agreement by the 19th meeting of the Economic Leaders of APEC, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum to be held in Hawaii in November, 2011.

In the meantime, further negotiations are planned for March 24 – April 1 (round 6, Singapore), 20 – 24 June (round 7, Vietnam), 6 – 11 September (round 8, San Francisco, USA), and 24 – 28 October (round 9, Lima, Peru).

During the TPP negotiation round in Chile in February 2011, negotiators received strong messages from prominent civil society groups demanding an end to the secrecy that has shielded TPP negotiations from the scrutiny of national lawmakers and the public. Letters addressed to government representatives in Australia, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand and the U.S. emphasized that both the process and effect of the proposed TPP agreement is deeply undemocratic. TPP negotiators apparently discussed the requests for greater public disclosure during the February 2011 negotiations, but took no action.

Why You Should Care

TPP raises significant concerns about citizens’ privacy, freedom of expression and due process rights, innovation and the future of the Internet’s global infrastructure, and the right of sovereign nations to develop policies and laws that best meet their domestic priorities and enable access to knowledge for the world’s citizens.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is pursuing a TPP agreement that will require signatory counties to adopt heightened copyright protection that advances the agenda of the U.S. entertainment and pharmaceutical industries, but omits the flexibilities and exceptions that protect Internet users and technology innovators.

The TPP will affect countries beyond the nine that are currently involved in negotiations. The new TPP agreement will build upon a 2005 agreement between New Zealand, Chile, Singapore and Brunei Darussalam (the P4 agreement) but will include more extensive provisions on intellectual property and other issues. The TPP will set rules that will likely be adopted initially by the 21 member economies in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum. The TPP is being negotiated by 9 members of APEC, and negotiators plan to finalize the “TPP concept” at the APEC Economic Leaders meeting in November 2011.

Like ACTA, the TPP Agreement is a plurilateral agreement that will be used to create new heightened global IP enforcement norms. Countries that are not parties to the negotiation will likely be asked to accede to the TPP as a condition of bilateral trade agreements with the U.S. and other TPP members, or evaluated against the TPP’s standards in the annual Special 301 process administered by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

Source:https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp