Historical account of dwindling national flexibilities from the Paris Convention to post‐TRIPS era: What implications for access‐to‐medicines in low‐and‐middle‐income‐countries?

Abstract

It is arguable that the most significant feature of the maiden Paris Convention is the creation of a remarkably broad national policy space which allowed Union members to balance the implementation of required obligations with the need to occasionally attend to national exigencies. Thus, a member may choose not to offer industrial property protection if national interests would be best served by doing so. While subsequent revisions to the Paris Convention chipped away at national flexibilities, the most strident attack to national flexibilities occurs under the Agreement for the Trade‐Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and the period after it. This paper puts the almost‐unnoticed whittling down of national flexibilities in international patent agreements in historical perspective. It subsequently discusses four ways through which this development could exacerbate access‐to‐medicines in low‐and‐middle‐income‐countries.

Between Regional Recommendations and National Implementation: An Analysis of the East African Community Partner States’ Legislative Responses to TRIPS Obligations

“… 126 For some background on the compulsory-licence-for export regime, see Olatunji ( 2022 ), p. 402 (particularly footnote 157). …”