No counterfeit medicine manufacturing in Philippines – IPOPHL

MANILA, Philippines — The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) said no counterfeit medicines are being produced in the country, after a recent US government report cited the Philippines as among the leading sources of fake medicines worldwide.

IPOPHL director general Rowel Barba said in a text message he met with the US Trade Representative (USTR) last week and reiterated the Philippines’ answers to rehashed concerns on counterfeit medicines.

“There is no counterfeit medicine manufacturing in the Philippines as reported by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration)  in the NCIPR (National Committee on IP Rights). We suspect transshipments,” he said.

IPOPHL deputy director general Teodoro Pascua said in a text message, that according to the Bureau of Customs (BOC), Philippine National Police (PNP), National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and FDA, counterfeit pharmaceutical products seized in the Philippines come from abroad and do not originate from the country.

“Recent (January to April 2022) raids conducted by BOC and NBI involving probable counterfeit pharmaceuticals indicate that the items came from abroad and have not been registered with FDA,” he said.

While the Philippines remained out of the watch list of countries with issues on IP rights protection and enforcement in the USTR’s Special 301 Report released last week, the US government raised concern over counterfeit medicines in the country.

The USTR cited a study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and European Union Intellectual Property Office which found the Philippines and other countries like China, India, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Pakistan as the leading sources of counterfeit medicines distributed globally.

In addition, USTR said that in the past year, countries continue to report significant quantities of counterfeit imports from China, including coronavirus disease 2019 testing kits, personal protective equipment such as those air-purifying particulate respirators meeting US Department of Health certification standards (N95) and equivalent masks, sanitizers, detergents and disinfectants.

“We visited the report which OECD cited and it apparently covered matters between 2014 and 2016, in short, items which most likely are outdated and no longer exist,” he said.

Nonetheless, the IPOPHL is conferring with the FDA, PNP, NBI and BOC on the matter.

Apart from counterfeit medicines, the USTR said the Philippines, along with India and Malaysia reportedly have slow opposition or cancellation proceedings on trademarks.

Both concerns were also raised by the USTR in last year’s Special 301 report.

“We have been improving our processes since I took over in 2020. We just have to comply with the processes under the IP Code on cancellation of trademarks,” Barba said.

Pascua said the IPOPHL’s Bureau of Legal Affairs, which has instituted and strengthened its alternative dispute resolution processes, has seen an increase in cases resolved through the alternative mechanism.

He also said cases submitted for decision have been given a 40-day period for issuance of decision.

“Thus, the improvements made will make disposition of trademark opposition cases one of the fastest in ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations),” he said.

While USTR raised some concerns on counterfeit medicines and trademark cancellation proceedings in the Philippines, it recognized the country as among those with measures against unauthorized camcording.

“The US urges countries to adopt laws and enforcement practices designed to prevent unauthorized camcording, such as laws that have been adopted in Canada, Japan, the Philippines, and Ukraine,” USTR said.

The USTR’s Special 301 report identified Argentina, Chile, China, India, Indonesia, Russia, and Venezuela as countries on the priority watch list or those with the most significant concerns on insufficient IP protection or enforcement. These countries will be subject to intense bilateral engagement in the coming year.