abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapelocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewprofilerefreshnewssearchsecurityPathtagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

This page is not available in Français and is being displayed in English

Affaire

Allegations of pharmaceutical group's planned opposition to So. Africa reforms to increase access to medicines

In January 2014, the Innovative Pharmaceutical Association of South Africa (IPASA) was accused of planning and funding an advocacy campaign on behalf of its member companies. The campaign allegedly sought to oppose South Africa’s efforts to introduce intellectual property law reforms that would allow for patents belonging to IPASA’s member companies to be limited, and for cheaper generic versions to be produced.

In a leaked email, Merck and other members of IPASA discussed the strategy.

Media items on the IPASA campaign:

 

Business & Human Rights Resource Centre invited IPASA and its member companies to respond:

Members companies' responses & non-responses:

  • Abbott [We have invited Abbott to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Abbvie [We have invited Abbvie to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Alcon (part of Novartis) Novartis responded [PDF] on behalf of itself and Alcon
  • Allergan did not respond
  • Amgen [We have invited Amgen to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • AstraZeneca response [PDF]
  • Baxter response [PDF]
  • Bayer response [PDF]
  • Boehringer-Ingelheim response [PDF]
  • Bristol-Myers Squibb referred us to IPASA
  • Covidien [We have invited Covidien to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Eli Lilly [We have invited Eli Lilly to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Ferring [We have invited Ferring to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Galderma response [PDF]
  • GE Health reffered us to IPASA
  • Johnson & Johnson response [PDF]
  • Merck (MSD) response [PDF]
  • Novartis response [PDF]
  • Novo Nordisk response [PDF] indicates it resigned from IPASA following campaign proposal:
  • Norgine [We have invited Norgine to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Pfizer referred us to IPASA
  • Roche response [PDF] indicates it resigned from IPASA following campaign proposal
  • Sanofi-Aventis [We have invited Sanofi-Aventis to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Servier [We have invited Servier to respond and will indicate here whether it responds]
  • Takeda referred us to IPASA

 

Novo Nordisk and Roche resigned from IPASA:

Réponses de l'entreprise

Abbott Laboratories

Aucune réponse

AbbVie

Aucune réponse

Allergan Voir la réponse
Amgen

Aucune réponse

AstraZeneca Voir la réponse
Baxter International Voir la réponse
Boehringer Ingelheim Voir la réponse
Bristol-Myers Squibb Voir la réponse
Covidien Voir la réponse
Eli Lilly Voir la réponse
Ferring Pharmaceuticals

Aucune réponse

Galderma Voir la réponse
GE Health (part of General Electric) Voir la réponse
Johnson & Johnson Voir la réponse
Norgine Pharmaceuticals Voir la réponse
Novartis Voir la réponse
Novo Nordisk (part of Novo Group) Voir la réponse
Sanofi

Aucune réponse

Servier

Aucune réponse

Takeda Pharmaceutical Voir la réponse

Story Timeline