COVID-19 ve Aşının Adil Dağıtımı: Dünya Ticaret Örgütü Anlaşmaları Bağlamında Ortaya Çıkan Sorunlar

Abstract

Aşı milliyetçiliği, COVID-19 pandemisi ile küresel olarak mücadelenin önünde bir engel olarak görülmektedir. Üretimi, dünya nüfusunun ihtiyacını karşılamaya yeterli miktarda olmayan COVID-19 aşıları, ağırlıklı olarak gelişmiş ve zengin devletler tarafından kendi nüfusları için satın alınmaktadır. Aşı üretiminin hızlanması ve yaygın hale gelmesinin önünde bir engel olarak fikri mülkiyet hakları korumasının bulunduğu gözlemlenebilir. Dünya Ticaret Örgütü (DTÖ) nezdinde, Hindistan ve Güney Afrika bu nedenle bir aykırılık izni talebi başvurusunda bulunmuşlardır. Bu talep, pandemi son bulana dek, fikri mülkiyet hakları korumasına ilişkin anlaşma hükümlerine aykırılığa izin verilmesini amaçlamaktadır. Ancak, amaçlandığı gibi bir karar alınmasını sağlamak henüz mümkün olmamıştır. Bu taleple ilgili olarak çeşitli görüşler ileri sürülmektedir. Aykırılık izni kararının mutlaka gerekli olmadığı ve GATT ve TRIPS Anlaşmaları hükümlerinin aynı amaca hizmet etmek için yeterli olduğu ifade edilmektedir. Bu makalede söz konusu aykırılık izni talebinin neden önemli olduğu açıklanmaktadır. Aykırılık izni yerine alternatif olarak ileri sürülen ulusal güvenlik istisnalarına başvurma veya zorunlu lisanslama yönteminin COVID-19 aşıları açısından uygulanabilirliği değerlendirilmektedir. DTÖ Anlaşmaları altında hâlihazırda var olan bu usullere başvurmanın bazı bedelleri olacağı ve bu nedenle bir aykırılık izni kararının gerekli olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır. Son olarak aşıların uluslararası ticaretinde miktar kısıtlamaları sorunu ele alınmakta ve aşı milliyetçiliği eleştirilerine de yol açan bu uygulamanın DTÖ kurallarına uygunluğu sorunu incelenmektedir.

Keywords

• Aşı milliyetçiliği
• TRIPS
• Zorunlu lisans
• Aykırılık izni kararı
• İlaç patenti

COVID-19 and Equitable Distribution of Vaccine: Emerging Debates within the Framework of the World Trade Organization Agreements

Abstract

Vaccine nationalism is an obstacle to combating the global COVID-19 pandemic. Since the production of COVID-19 vaccines is still insufficient to meet the needs of the world population, developed countries primarily purchase them for their populations. The protection of intellectual property rights is another obstacle to the acceleration and widespread use of vaccine production. In order to overcome this obstacle, India and South Africa filed a waiver request before the World Trade Organization (WTO). This request aims to obtain official permission for the otherwise breach of the WTO Agreements provisions protecting intellectual property rights until the pandemic is over. The waiver request has become a topic of differing analysis. Some say the waiver request is unnecessary as the existing provisions of the GATT and TRIPS Agreements sufficiently serve the same purpose. In this article, the waiver request is considered critical and necessary. The provisions of the WTO Agreements that allow recourse to the national security exceptions or compulsory licensing were analyzed to evaluate whether or not they would be an alternative to a waiver decision. They concluded that resorting to these already existing procedures in the WTO Agreements would likely bring about further trade disputes and, therefore, a waiver decision is preferable. Finally, this article addresses the issue of quantity restrictions in the international trade of vaccines.

Keywords

• Vaccine nationalism
• TRIPS
• Compulsory license
• Waiver
• Pharmaceutical patents

References

1. Abbott FM, ‘The TRIPS Agreement Article 73 Security Exceptions and the COVID-19 Pandemic’ (2020) Research Paper 116 South Centre Geneva Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
2. Bacchus J, ‘An Unnecessary Proposal: A WTO Waiver of Intellectual Property Rights for COVID-19 Vaccines’ (2020) 78 Free Trade Bulletin Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
3. Baker B, ‘South Africa and India’s proposal to waive recognition and enforcement of intellectual property rights for covid-19 medical technologies deserves universal support, but countries also have to take domestic measures’ (Infojustice 11 October 2020) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
4. Baschuk B, ‘WTO Chief Calls on Nations to End Covid Export Restrictions’ (Bloomberg 17 February 2021) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
5. Bollyky TJ and Bown CP, 'The Tragedy of Vaccine Nationalism: Only Cooperation Can End the Pandemic' (2020) 99 Foreign Aff 96-109.
6. Containment and Treatment Of Covid-19 Communication from India and South Africa (2 October 2020) IP/C/W/669 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
7. Cotter TF, ‘Market Fundamentalism and the TRIPs Agreement’ (2004) 22 (2) Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal 307-342.
8. Çalışkan Y and Sarıbeyoğlu Skalar M, ‘Türkiye’nin ilaç üretimini yerelleştirme amacının hukuki çerçevesi’ (2016) 12 (47) Fikrî ve Sınai Haklar Dergisi 849-885.

9. Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health (14 November 2001) WT/MIN(01)/DEC/2 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
10. Gayle H, Foege W, Brown L and Kahn B (eds), Framework for Equitable Allocation of COVID-19 Vaccine (The National Academies Press 2020).
11. General Council Amendment of the TRIPS Agreement Decision (6 December 2005) WT/L/641 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
12. General Council Least developed country Members Obligations under article 70.8 and article 70.9 of the TRIPS Agreement with respect to pharmaceutical products (30 November 2015) WT/L/971 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
13. Guterres A, ‘Only together can we end this pandemic and recover’ (UN 11 March 2021) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
14. Hoekman B, Fiorini M and Yildirim A, ‘Export Restrictions: A Negative-Sum Policy Response to the COVID-19 Crisis’ European University Institute Working Paper (2020) European University Institute Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Global Governance Programme 23 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
15. Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health Decision (30 August 2003) WT/L/540 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
16. Implementation of paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and public health Decision (30 August 2003) WT/L/540 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
17. Kituyi M, ‘A new take on trade’ (UNCTAD 29 October 2020) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
18. Korea – Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh, Chilled and Frozen Beef–Appellate Body Report (10 January 2001) WT/DS161 [Korea – Beef] para 162 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
19. Labonte R and Johri M, ‘COVID-19 drug and vaccine patents are putting profit before people’ (The Conversation 5 November 2020) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
20. Legge DG, ‘COVID-19 response exposes deep flaws in global health governance’ (2020) 20(3) Global Social Policy 383-387 Erişim Tarihi 5 April
21. McCarthy N, ‘America First? Covid-19 Production & Exports’ (Statista 19 May 2021) Erişim Tarihi 25 May 2021
22. MacLennan S, ‘COVID vaccines: is it legal for the EU to restrict exports?’ (The Conversation 3 February 2021) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
23. Mantilla Blanco S and Pehl A, National security exceptions in international trade and investment agreements (Springer International Publishing 2020).
24. Ministerial Declaration (14 November 2001) WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1 para 19 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
25. Murillo SES, ‘Fair or fraud: Has the Protocol amending TRIPS flourished or failed?’ (2017) 27 Indiana Int’l & Comp. Law Review 191-207.
26. Rungpry SK, ‘Compulsory licensing issues and trends in Asia’ (2013) 2 (6) Pharmaceutical Patent Analyst 681-683 Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
27. Stout MV, ‘Crossing the Trips Nondiscrimination Line: How CAFTA Pharmaceutical Patent Provisions Violate Trips Article 27.1’ (2008) 14 Boston University Journal of Science & Technology Law 177-200.
28. Sykes AO, ‘TRIPS, pharmaceuticals, developing countries, and the Doha "solution"’ (2002) 3 (1) Chicago Journal of International Law 47-68.
29. Thrasher R, ‘How will everyone benefit if WTO members sign the TRIPS COVID-19 waiver?’ (Open Access Government 15 February 2021) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
30. TWN, ‘TWN Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues’ (Third World Network 20 October 2020) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
31. UNICEF, ‘In the COVID-19 vaccine race, we either win together or lose together Joint statement by UNICEF Executive Director Henrietta Fore and WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus’ (Unicef 10 February 2021) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
32. Urias E and Ramani SV, ‘Access to medicines after TRIPS: Is compulsory licensing an effective mechanism to lower drug prices? A Review of the existing evidence’ (2020) Journal of International Business Policy 1, 2. Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
33. Weintraub R, Bitton A and Rosenberg ML, ‘The danger of vaccine nationalism’ (Harvard Business Review 22 May 2020) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
34. WHO, ‘WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19’ (WHO 12 October 2020) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
35. WHO, ‘WHO SAGE values framework for the allocation and prioritization of COVID-19 vaccination’ (WHO 13 September 2020) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
36. WTO, ‘WTO rules and environmental policies: GATT exceptions’ (WTO) Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
37. WTO, China –Measures Related to the Exportation of Various Raw Materials—Panel Report (5 July 2011) WT/DS394 [China – Raw Materials] Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
38. WTO, European Communities — Measures Affecting Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos–Appelate Body Report (12 March 2001) WT/DS135 [EC — Asbestos] Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
39. WTO, Russia: Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit—Report of the Panel (5 April 2019) WT/DS512/R Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
40. WTO, Saudi Arabia: Measures Concerning the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights—Report of The Panel (16 June 2020) WT/DS567/R [Saudi Arabia — Protection of IPRs] Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021
41. Yılmaz M, ‘Dünya Ticaret Örgütü Hukuku Bakımından Uluslararası Ticarette Güvenlik İstisnası’ (2020) 19 (1) Galatasaray Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 249-304.
42. Yu PK, ‘TRIPS Enforcement and Developing Countries’ (2011) 26 (3) American University International Law Review 727-782.
43. Yüksel C and Baran D, ‘COVID-19 Salgını ve Bulaşıcı Hastalıkların Yarattığı Küresel Krizlerle Mücadelede Uluslararası Hukuk’ (2020) 78 (2) İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası 885-934.
44. Zhou J, ‘New WTO Ruling on National Security in Qatar-Saudi Arabia Case and its Impact on South Korea-Japan Dispute’ (2020) 24 (22) ASIL Insights Erişim Tarihi 5 April 2021