Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T08:10:21.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does the Pharmaceutical Sector Have a Coresponsibility for the Human Right to Health?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2011

DORIS SCHROEDER
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The highest attainable standard of health is a fundamental human right, which has been part of international law since 1948. States and their institutions are the primary duty bearers responsible for ensuring that human rights are respected, protected, and fulfilled. However, more recently it has been argued that pharmaceutical companies have a coresponsibility to fulfill the human right to health. Most prominently, this coresponsibility has been expressed in the United Nations (UN) Millennium Goal 8 Target 4. “In cooperation with pharmaceutical companies, provide access to affordable essential drugs in developing countries.”

Type
Symposium on Global Bioethics
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , April 2011 , pp. 298 - 308
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. WHO. Constitution; available at http://www.who.int/governance/eb/constitution/en/index.html (last accessed 1 Jul 2010).

2. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 25(1); 1948; available at http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a25 (last accessed 1 Jul 2010).

3. UN Special Rapporteur on the Right of Everyone to the Enjoyment of the Highest Attainable Standard of Physical and Mental Health (henceforth, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to health) A/61/338; available at http://www.ggp.up.ac.za/human_rights_access_to_medicines/additional/2009/hunt%20reports/HuntReportAccesstoEssentialMedicinesandMaternalMortality.pdf; also E/CN.4/2006/48; available at http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G06/114/69/PDF/G0611469.pdf?OpenElement; also E/CN.4/2006/48Add.2; available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/chr/docs/62chr/E.CN.4.2006.48.Add.1.pdf; also E/CN.4/2005/51/Add.3; available at http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G05/106/45/PDF/G0510645.pdf?OpenElement; also E/CN.4/2004/49/Add.1; available at http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/e06a5300f90fa0238025668700518ca4/5860d7d863239d82c1256e660056432a/$FILE/G0411390.pdf (last accessed 1 Jul 2010).

4. Editorial: Right-to-health responsibilities of pharmaceutical companies. The Lancet 2009;373:1998. For the sake of brevity and readability, we shall henceforth shorten the expression “the human right to the highest attainable standard of health” to “the human right to health.”

5. UN Millennium Goal 8, Target 4; available at http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/global.shtml (last accessed 1 Jul 2010).

6. See note 2, Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948.

7. United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, E/C.12/2000/4. (General Comments) General Comment No. 12; 2000; available at http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(symbol)/E.C.12.2000.4.En (last accessed 1 Jul 2010).

8. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Art. 2, emphasis added; available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cescr.htm#part2 (last accessed 1 Jul 2010).

9. Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948: Preamble, emphasis added; available at http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a25 (last accessed 1 Jul 2010).

10. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Right of Everyone to the Enjoyment of the Highest Attainable Standard of Health, Paul Hunt–Annex–Mission to Glaxosmithkline 2009; 11, para 35; available at http://198.170.85.29/Paul-Hunt-report-on-GSK-5-May-2009.pdf (last accessed 10 Jul 2010).

11. Leisinger, KM.Capitalism with a human face: The UN Global Compact. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 2007;28:12.Google Scholar

12. Spitzeck, H, Pirson, M, Amann, W, Khan, S, von Kimakowitz, E, eds. Humanism in Business. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13. I exempt animal experimentation from this discussion.

14. Oxfam. Investing for Life: Meeting Poor People’s Needs for Access to Medicines through Responsible Business Practices, Briefing Paper 109; 2007:1; available at http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/bp109-investing-for-life-0711.pdf (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

15. See note 4, Editorial 2009:1998.

16. See note 11, Leisinger 2007:12.

17. Joseph, S.Pharmaceutical corporations and access to drugs: The fourth wave of corporate human rights scrutiny. Human Rights Quarterly 2003;25(2):425–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18. Dunfee, TW.Do firms with unique competencies for rescuing victims of human catastrophes have special obligations? Corporate responsibility and the AIDS catastrophe in Sub-Saharan Africa. Business Ethics Quarterly 2006;16(2):185–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

19. See note 10, Hunt 2009:11, para 36.

20. Leisinger, KM.On Corporate Responsibility for Human Rights 2006:17; available at http://www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/news_events/9.6/corpresforhr_kl.pdf (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).Google Scholar

21. Bulard M. Apartheid of pharmacology. Le Monde Diplomatique; available at http://mondediplo.com/2000/01/12bulard (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

22. CPI-M to launch agitation against price rise, drought. Thaindian News 2009 Aug 27; available at http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/politics/cpi-m-to-launch-agitation-against-price-rise-drought_100238934.html (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

23. See note 10, Hunt 2009:11, para 36.

24. Second-line drugs are used when the standard therapy fails and are often much more expensive than the first drug of choice.

25. Avert (not dated). Aids, Drug Prices and Generic Drugs; available at http://www.avert.org/generic.htm (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

26. Danzon, PM, Towse, A.Differential pricing for pharmaceuticals: reconciling access, R&D and patents. International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics 2003;3:183–205, at p. 185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27. In line with Art. 25(1), see note 2 above, we take basic human needs to comprise food, clothing, housing, and medical care.

28. Helfer, L.Intellectual property rights in plant varieties: International legal regimes and policy options for national governments, Part IV, United Nations FAO Legislative Study 85 2004; available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5714e/y5714e05.htm (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).Google Scholar

29. With a compulsory license, a government forces a patent holder to allow the manufacture of generic copies of a drug at significantly reduced prices.

30. SciDev. Drug licences all for the poor, says Thai minister; available at http://www.scidev.net/en/news/drug-licences-all-for-the-poor-says-thai-minister.html (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

31. Schroeder, D, Singer, P.Access to life-saving medicines and intellectual property rights: An ethical assessment. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, this issue, 279–289.Google Scholar

32. Bunting M. Profits that kill. The Guardian 2001 Feb 12; available at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/feb/12/wto.aids (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

33. Nagel, T. Death. In: Nagel, T.Mortal Questions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1979Google Scholar; Feldman, F.Some puzzles about the evil of death. The Philosophical Review 1991;100:205–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34. Because of constraints of space, I do not include here possible provisos; e.g., foreseeable harm with the informed, voluntary consent of the potentially injured party may be justifiable.

35. Nussbaum, M.Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2000:78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36. See note 35, Nussbaum 2000:83.

37. Singer, P.The Life You Can Save. Melbourne: Text Publishing Company; 2009:15.Google Scholar

38. Locke J. The Second Treatise of Civil Government, Chapter II, Of the State of Nature, Section 6. 1690; available at http://www.milestonedocuments.com/documents/full-text/john-lockes-second-treatise-on-civil-government (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

39. See note 32, Bunting 2001.

40. World Intellectual Property Organization. Treaties and Contracting Parties; available at http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?lang=en&treaty_id=6 (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

41. Scotcher, S.Innovation and Incentives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2004:34.Google Scholar

42. Hollis, A, Pogge, T.The Health Impact Fund: Making New Medicines Accessible for All. Incentives for Global Health; 2008; available at http://www.yale.edu/macmillan/igh/hif_book.pdf (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).Google Scholar

43. Attaran, A.How do patents and economic policies affect access to essential medicines in developing countries? Health Affairs 2004;23(3):155–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

44. Department of International Development. Increasing Access to Essential Medicines in the Developing World. London: Department for International Development; 2004Google Scholar.

45. Grover A. Promotion and Protection of all Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, including the Right to Development, a Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Right of Everyone to the Enjoyment of the Highest Attainable Standard of Physical and Mental Health. United Nations; 2009: A/HRC/11/12 points 14 and 94; available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/11session/A.HRC.11.12_en.pdf (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

46. Pogge, T, Schroeder, D. Why we need a new approach to pharmaceutical innovation: A pragmatic answer to a moral question. In: Noppen, M, Wynants, M, eds. In Sickness and Health: The Future of Medicine. Brussels: Vrije Universiteit Brussel Press; 2009:197–213.Google Scholar

47. Editorial: India’s choice. New York Times 2005 Jan 18; available at http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/18/opinion/18tues2.html (last accessed 5 Jul 2010).

48. Selgelid, M, Sepers, EM. Patents, profits, and the price of pills: Implications for access and availability. In: Illingworth, P, Schuklenk, U, Cohen, JC, eds. The Power of Pills: Social, Ethical and Legal Issues in Drug Development, Marketing and Pricing Policies. London: Pluto Press; 2006:153–63, at p. 153.Google Scholar

49. Pang, T.Developing medicines in line with global public health needs: The role of the World Health Organization. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, this issue, 290–297.Google Scholar

50. In this limited space, one cannot detail how this could or should be done. Klaus Leisinger and Karin Schmitt give some examples in the next contribution to this Symposium. However, it is also worth emphasizing the importance of supporting reform plans to modify the intellectual property rights system, a point eloquently made by Aidan Hollis and Thomas Pogge in the epilogue to this Symposium.