Bill Malamud, executive vice president of the American Chamber of Commerce, disputed a brief in the DR1 News last week where a reference is made to whether the industrial intellectual property bill passed by the Congress last week is compliant with the World Trade Organization stipulations (see http://www.dr1.com/daily/news041900.shtml). Malamud says that the position of Amcham, ASIEX, EFID and ARAPF is that the new legislation is not compliant with the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), especially on the issue of compulsory licensing. Furthermore, Malamud argues that the DR is putting itself at risk to sanctions and the loss of CBI and GSP beneficiary status. The dispute primarily revolves around pharmaceutical products and patent holding rights. When asked to comment, Federico Cuello, Dominican Republic representative before the World Trade Organization, was critical of these comments. He said that whether the legislation is compliant or not is to be settled by the Dispute-Settlement Body (DSB) of the WTO that has jurisdiction under international law. He added that "any other judgement that may be passed at the instance of a private party that may lead to unilateral actions by any country, are also liable of the appropriate counteractions before the DSB of the WTO, which is the single multilateral body with jurisdiction in cases like this." He says the United Kingdom and New Zealand have already won similar disputes versus US pharmaceutical companies. Cuello considers the industrial intellectual property legislation "literally a matter of life and death." As passed, the bill will permit local pharmaceutical companies to manufacture and sell low cost medicines.
