By Ann M. Simmons, Los Angeles Times. Tribune staff reporter Bruce Japsen in Chicago contributed to this report.
April 20, 2001
PRETORIA, South Africa -- The world's biggest drug companies dropped their controversial lawsuit against the South African government Thursday, paving the way for this country to provide cheaper, generic versions of medications, including those to combat AIDS.

Acting on behalf of 39 drug companies, the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association unconditionally withdrew its challenge to legislation--passed in 1997 but not yet implemented--that allows the government to make or buy cheaper copies of patented drugs.

The outcome is seen by human-rights and health activists as a significant step in the fight to secure treatment for millions of Africans infected with HIV, the virus that can lead to acquired immune deficiency syndrome, and it is expected to help developing nations obtain less-expensive medicine.

The settlement allows South Africans "to pursue policies that we believe are critical to securing medicines at affordable rates and exercising wise control over them," said Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang. "We have undertaken to include pharmaceutical manufacturers in such initiatives, where appropriate, and we fully intend to pursue this course of action."

The drug companies, which include giants Merck & Co., Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., GlaxoSmithKline and Boehringer Ingelheim, had claimed that a section of the 1997 law that allows South Africa to import or make cheaper drugs overrode their patent rights. The patents are necessary, they said, to encourage drug research.

AIDS activists, who packed the Pretoria courtroom, burst into song and dance when a lawyer for the drug companies announced the settlement and agreed to pay the estimated $286,000 cost of the case.

Tshabalala-Msimang said the government had not agreed to any deals in exchange for the withdrawal of the lawsuit. The agreement was brokered during talks involving United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan and South African President Thabo Mbeki, she said.

The health minister said South Africa had reiterated its pledge to honor international trade agreements when implementing the law and had invited members of the pharmaceutical industry and the public to help draft the regulations governing the law.

But critics, who accuse the government of indifference in its approach to tackling the country's AIDS crisis, remained skeptical that South Africa will take quick advantage of its ability to implement the legislation.

Nearly 70 percent of the world's 36 million HIV and AIDS cases and 90 percent of all related deaths occur in sub-Saharan Africa, according to UN statistics. About 4.7 million South Africans--more than 10 percent of the population--are living with HIV.

The standard triple-therapy used in treatment costs $10,000 to $15,000 a year. Generic versions of the drugs could cost as little as $300 a year; this would still be unaffordable for most people in South Africa. The annual per capita spending on medication in sub-Saharan Africa is $8, according to the World Bank.

North Chicago-based Abbott Laboratories wasn't a named plaintiff in the case, but the company was a member of the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers' Association. Abbott also inherited a role in the litigation through its recent acquisition of Knoll Pharmaceuticals, which was a plaintiff in the case.

Abbott wouldn't comment Thursday about the drugmakers' decision to drop the lawsuit, but said the company "strongly supports the maintenance of intellectual property rights through international patent protection," the company said.

Abbott earlier this month slashed the price of two of its protease inhibitors for Africa.

/////////
Die 39 Pharma-Unternehmen haben ihre Klage gegen die südafrikanische Regierung fallenlassen. Es ging darum, daß Medikamente (gegen HIV, AIDS, aber auch andere Krankheiten) zu teuer für Südafrika waren. Südafrika hatte deshalb billige Plagiate ins Auge gefaßt, worauf die Unternehmen Patentrechtsverletzungen geltend gemacht hatten. Diverse "AIDS-Aktivisten" begrüßen diese Entwicklung als Meilenstein, warnen jedoch die südafrikanische Regierung davor,womöglich trotzdem weiterhin zu "zaudern". Aus ihrer Sicht nicht zu Unrecht, wie die folgenden Artikel zeigen.


[II.] "South Africa May Reject Use of AIDS Drugs"

Wall Street Journal (04.20.01) Robert Block

Moments after attorneys representing 39 pharmaceutical companies dropped a lawsuit to stop South Africa from importing cheap generic AIDS drugs, the country's health minister stood before a crowded conference room and delivered a surprising announcement. South Africa, said Dr. Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, had no immediate plans to use the landmark legal victory to obtain antiretroviral AIDS drugs. "We never said we want to use antiretrovirals," she told the audience, which just moments prior had been singing and clapping. "But we have to place our options on the table to see what we will use."

The moment marked the beginning of the next battle over AIDS treatment in South Africa: the struggle over how, or even whether, the drugs will be distributed and administered. Claiming victory for government's supporters, Kevin Watkins, policy adviser to the British charity Oxfam, warned: "If the government doesn't grasp this opportunity, this struggle would have been wasted." Zackie Achmat, chair of the South African Treatment Action Campaign, announced after the health minister's statement that activists would work to persuade the government to change its position on antiretroviral drugs.

Tshabalala-Msimang said the drugs are still too expensive, too dangerous and too difficult to manage for the government to incorporate them into its AIDS-fighting plans. Instead the government backed nutrition programs and better treatment of infections, she said. "I think we are doing very well," she said. Drug companies agreed that more affordable AIDS drugs are only a small part of the effort to fight AIDS in poor countries. Jean-Pierre Garnier, chief executive of GlaxoSmithKline, noted that one Boehringer Ingelheim AIDS drug has been available for almost a year and many African nations, including South Africa, do not use it. Jeffrey Sturchio, spokesperson for Merck & Co., said the development "underscores... the importance of intellectual- property protection and the need to balance intellectual-property protection with the health needs of South Africans."

//////////
Die südafrikanische Gesundheitsministerin macht deutlich, daß sie auf die "anti-retroviralen" (also Anti-HIV) Medikamente gar nicht so scharf ist, und die südafrikanische Regierung sich lediglich alle Optionen offenhalten will. Außerdem seien die Medikamente immer noch zu teuer. Es geht aber nicht nur um "anti-retrovirale" Medikamente, dies wird im folgenden Artikel deutlich, dessen Herkunft ich leider nicht kenne, aber nachzureichen zu können hoffe.


[III.] "It is erroneous to suggest we do not give treatment to AIDS sufferers"

Minutes after leaving the Pretoria High Court in joyous celebration at the decision by 39 drugs companies to abandon their case against the South African government over patent protection, Dr Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, Health Minister, said the government still had doubts about using anti-retrovirals and had no plans to make them available in the public sector.

"It is erroneous to suggest we do not give treatment to AIDS sufferers just because we do not provide anti-retroviral therapy," the minister emphasised. "We do treat pneumonia or thrush or skin diseases. By providing adequate nutrition and by curing opportunistic infections, AIDS sufferers can function adequately.

"We are concerned with resistance to anti-retrovirals. We also need to build up the capacity to administer the drugs adequately and effectively. The infrastructure must first be in place," she said.

/////////
"Es wäre ein Irrtum anzunehmen, daß wir AIDS-Kranken keine medizinische Behandlung zukommen ließen." Laut Gesundheitsministerin Dr. Tshabalala-Msimang besteht die Behandlung darin, die opportunistischen Infektionen bekämpfen und für ausreichende Ernährung sorgen; die Regierung bleibe aber skeptisch gegenüber "anti-retroviralen" Medikamenten!