The TRIPS agreement and developing countries: a discussion of the paragraph 6 of the Doha declaration on public health

The Paragraph 6 solution arrived on 30th August 2003 to facilitate export of drugs to the countries which were not able to manufacture said drugs shows the total marginalization of developing countries in international treaty negotiations. A simple proposal by developing counties to use Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement for such manufacture and export to non-manufacturing countries in order to avoid expensive litigations with the pharmaceutical multinationals took an ugly turn where not only the said proposal was totally rejected but export was added as one of the patenting rights in the TRIPS Agreement with payment of remuneration to patent holders. This introduction of export as one of the patenting rights was surrounded by a thicket of rules on the plea that such products would be diverted to ensure that the needing countries never acquire the requisite drugs. This article analyses the events leading to the establishment of the TRIPS Agreement, the elimination of developing countries from such negotiations through the use of suitably placed officials in the negotiating forums, the role of CEOs of the multinationals and the business NGOs such as International Intellectual Property Alliance and IPC (Intellectual Property Committee), epistemic community consisting of individuals such as Jacques Gorlin and Eric Smith and the subsequent development leading to the finalization of Para 6 Solution, which was an exact replication of events during the TRIPS negotiations. The analysis suggests that developing countries do not have any say in international negotiations and their agreements to such negotiations are essentially to legitimize their colonized existence.