Bombay High court rejects plea to direct his wife to undergo check-up for HIV #Womenrights


, TNN | Jun 15, 2013,

High court rejects plea for wife to undergo check-up for HIV
The HC said it was “absurd” for husband to say it was in the interest of his wife to go in for early HIV detection.
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Friday upheld a family court (FC) order rejecting a man’s plea to direct his wife to undergo a medical check-up as he strongly suspected her to be HIV positive. The court said it was “absurd” for him to say it was in the interest of his wife to go in for early detection.

Justice Roshan Dalvi heard a petition by Santa Cruz resident Joel D’Souza (name changed), who met Joan (name changed) through a marriage bureau. Both professionals, they married on December 26, 2009. In June 2010, Joan had typhoid and went to her mother’s place nearby. Thereafter, Joel stopped calling or receiving her calls. On July 7, 2010, he took her call but told her he would not take her back, without explanation. The medical test report of July 7, 2010 confirmed Joan was cured of typhoid and tests included for HIV antibodies.

On July 10, 2010, on reaching her matrimonial home, she found Joel had changed the lock. On October 22, 2010, he filed for divorce alleging impotency/non-consummation of marriage and cruelty. Pending the petition, on March 16, 2011 Joel filed an application praying for direction to Joan to undergo HIV, TB and hepatitis tests along with tests for impotency/failure to consummate the marriage as he suspected she was HIV positive.

In his application before the FC, Joel gave many reasons, including fever, tiredness, body ache, dry cough, diarrhoea, abdominal pain and headache. He said Joan had a bloated abdomen although her face, hands and legs were very thin and due to this she wore long outfits. “On an official website of HIV, it is documented that HIV is medically caused due to accumulation of fat in the stomach,” he stated. He said she spoke in her sleep using the words ‘HIV’ and ‘AIDS‘ and mentioned ‘Jack Dorsan’, who he found on the Internet was in the prostitution business. He said his wife had stored Dorsan’s telephone number and spoke to him on the day of their wedding.

He said she applied lip balm five to six times a day “as the best treatment for Herpes Simplex Virus is keeping the lips moist”. Joan said Joel’s suspicion was “reckless, wild and cruel” and he himself needed treatment.

The FC on May 16, 2012 rejected his application with costs saying, however strong his suspicion, he had to prove the allegations by furnishing evidence so that the court can grant him relief. Joel moved the high court in October 2012.

Joan’s advocate Mini Mathew argued that the July 7, 2010 report confirming she was cured of typhoid was sufficient to hold that it was not necessary to send her for an HIV test. She said Joel had been spreading rumours about her. “These allegations are stigmatizing. Her reputation is ruined,” she said.

Joel’s advocate Uday Warunjikar said, “He caught his wife taking HIV medicines. If she is not suffering from HIV, why is she afraid of the test?” he asked. Justice Dalvi remarked, “I doubt the marriage can be reconciled. Both sides must move for an amicable settlement.” She added, “Why don’t you throw her out in a little respectable way? It will boomerang on you.

 

Global thematic campaign on Gender and Reproductive Justice #Vaw


Gender 'tag cloud'

 

People’s Health Movement

 

8th March, 2013

 

 

 

At the People’s Health Assembly 3 held in Cape Town, South Africa in July 2012, People’s Health Movement committed to build a campaign on gender issues through initiating separate circle on the Global thematic campaign on Genders within the PHM right to health campaign. Through the online correspondence in these last few months, a general view of expanding the gender circle has emerged, especially regarding specific themes of gender, equity, and violence, Sexual and Reproductive Health Rights and Reproductive Justice.

 

Why a Global thematic campaign on Gender

 

We, at PHM believe that Health Rights including Sexual and Reproductive Health Rights must be located within a perspective that recognizes social determinants of health, and universal health entitlements/access to healthcare. The framework should address the oppressive structures of neo-liberal globalization, capitalism, poverty, patriarchy, privatization of essential services, imperialism, militarization, fundamentalisms, heteronormativity, racism, casteism and ableism, which not only exacerbate poor physical, sexual, reproductive and emotional health for women and young girls but also disadvantage them in accessing health-care.

 

We are only too aware of how gender oppression is intricately linked to other systems of oppression and PHM’s agenda should be to make a conscious effort to create space and visibility for some such concerns that can often be observed to be marginalized even within progressive, rights movements. While they assume different forms in different contexts and social realities, issues of ability/disability, sexuality, health in the context of conflict, state sponsored coercive population policies, gender based violence, non-coercive access to contraception and abortion, and especially the rights of sex workers, transgender, HIV positive individuals in relation to all the above are sparsely raised on the public health platforms and health movements across the world.

 

There is a cyclical relation between violence and ill-health; both influence each other, yet gender based violence is rarely addressed as a human rights or public health issue. That violence takes varied forms and that gendered notions make certain peoples particular targets is a question of political violence that a movement like PHM needs to urgently address.

 

Historically, as we know that women’s ability to make choices and exercise autonomy in matters of sexuality and reproduction has been conditioned and constrained by economic, political, religious and cultural patterns, responding to a model of prescriptive ‘normality’ and disallowing any kind of behavior which deviates from this. The relegation of women’s health to maternity and family planning on the one hand and the concerted attack on women’s reproductive and sexual rights on the other are serious violations of women’s autonomy, personhood, dignity and human rights.

 

Throughout the world, society, law and cultural norms have repressed any behaviour that could challenge this prescriptive reproductive role of women. Reproduction itself becomes a site of coercion and social inequality, being regulated by morality, class, caste, race hierarchies and community. It is the same ideas of gender roles, relations and sexual division of labour that result in coercive structures for women, and further marginalize several persons who go against the existing heteronormativity.

 

As an object of policy, sexuality and sexual rights have generally been considered as an ‘unimportant’ and secondary issue. Women’s movements have also only gradually given space to these debates. That sexual rights for all are essential for better physical, mental and emotional health is a perspective that needs a much stronger acknowledgement and activism by both the state and social movements.

 

Within the health care systems, health professionals need to be sensitised in order to address all forms of violence and discrimination on the basis of gender within the private as well as public spheres. Health rights can be enjoyed by all and accessed at all times only if the rights of those who occupy low rungs in the gender hierarchy have secured rights in all spheres.

 

PHM is well-placed to address components of policy advocacy, capacity building, knowledge creation and health systems engagement within this umbrella framework.  The need is for us to foreground this perspectives in our strategies. We can hold capacity building and advocacy initiatives for SRHR, violence There is a need to conceptualize the campaigns/circles in a way that we understand the common systems of oppressions and gender hierarchies and are able to equally visiblize and address concerns of all those who are marginalized, exploited and discriminated against on the basis of their gender identities and sexual behaviour.

 

The thematic Circle will Insert all these concerns within the People’s health movement by- informing the PHM mandate and the campaign for Health For All and vis-à-vis gender. PHM will provide a platform for women across the world to articulate the above concerns as well as to share and learn from each other the creative struggles waged by people, especially by women, against injustice and inequality.

 

 

 

PHM global has already been engaged with many networks such as WGNRR, IWHM, ARROW, SAMA, WISH to name a few. We would like to welcome and invite networks/organisations, coalitions to join and collaborate with us on this initiative. Together we can strategise for a better world that is founded on social justice, non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all people.

 

contact:  <sarojinipr@gmail.com>

 

 

 

Child’s HIV cure won’t mean new treatments immediately #healthcare


Liz Szabo, USA TODAY6:38p.m.March 4, 2013

Doctors are thrilled with the cure of a 2½-year-girl infected with HIV at birth but say that extending that success to others will be a challenge.

More than 300,000 babies a year worldwide are born infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.

As of this week, doctors appear to have cured exactly one.

And while the Mississippi child’s story has generated excitement in the medical community, researchers also note that it will likely take years before they’re able to extend that success to a broader community of patients, if ever.

“This is a really groundbreaking report,” says Diane Havlir, a professor and AIDS researcher at the University of California-San Francisco, who attended a presentation of the new study Monday at an Atlanta medical conference.

“This tells us a cure is possible,” says Havlir, who wasn’t involved in the new study, which reported on a 2½-year-old girl who was infected with HIV at birth but apparently cured after 18 months of triple-drug therapy. “That is thrilling news.”

Doctors credit the child’s cure to early treatment; her physicians began treatment soon after delivery, which is the standard of care for the child of an untreated, HIV-positive mother.

STORY: Doctors report first cure of HIV in a child

Most adults can’t benefit from such early therapy, because they typically don’t even learn that they’re infected for months or years, says Rana Chakraborty, an associate professor of pediatrics at Emory University School of Medicine. The only adult to have been definitively cured of HIV had a unique situation: He had a bone-marrow transplant to treat his leukemia from a donor with a genetic mutation that provided protection from HIV.

Scientists will first have to learn what exactly allowed the child to be cured before they can apply that knowledge to developing vaccines or new drugs, he says.

And Havlir notes that doctors are unlikely to make any changes to children’s care before they can verify the study’s results. She notes that, in developed countries, doctors focus far more on prevention than treatment. Giving women anti-HIV therapy while pregnant reduces the risk of mother-to-child transmission by 98%.

But if the results hold up and doctors can identify the best medications, they could start anti-AIDS therapy on high-risk newborns even before getting results of their HIV tests, Havlir says.

That could be important in developing countries, where many women — like the mother of this Mississippi child — don’t get recommended care. The girl’s mother had no prenatal care, let alone anti-HIV therapy, before delivery. Then, when the girl was 18 months old, the mother stopped bringing her to the doctor, which left the child with no anti-HIV treatment for five months.

While the child’s story has been hailed as a victory for science, Chakraborty says the case also illustrates the single greatest challenge in treating AIDS: actually getting care to patients.

Delivering on the promise of scientific breakthroughs has been a challenge not just in developing countries of Africa, but in the USA.

Only 28% of people of the 1.2 million HIV-positive Americans have been diagnosed and treated successfully so that their levels of virus are undetectable, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

HIV has become entrenched among the poor in the USA. Many patients lack access to health care and grapple with other problems that keep them from getting the care they need, such as homelessness, drug addiction or mental illness, Chakraborty says.

“Many individuals fall out of care, especially in adolescence or young adulthood,” Chakraborty says. “Young people think they’re invincible.”

Yet Havlir says scientists are ready to confront such obstacles.

“There are daunting challenges,” Havlir says, “but they are challenges that the field is going to embrace, because many people think they are surmountable.”

 

Press Release- Campaign for Affordable Trastuzumab


The Department of Pharmaceuticals, Ministry of Commerce has just released a report by a committee set up to examine the issue of price negotiations for patented drugs.  Comments are being invited from stakeholders.

 

The Campaign for Access to Affordable Trastuzumab is shocked that the Department of Pharmaceuticals is even considering the option of negotiating with multinational pharma companies for price discounts.

We note with concern that this report comes at a time when the Ministry of Health is actively exploring options such as compulsory licensing for bringing down prices of life-saving patented drugs through allowing market competition by generics and biosimilars. Trastuzumab is one of the drugs being considered for compulsory licensing.

This ill-timed move by the Department of Pharmaceuticals will benefit none other than big pharma companies whose patents on life-saving drugs are the main barrier in access to health for millions of Indians.

Global experience shows clearly that measures such as negotiated price reductions and “managed competition” through voluntary licenses (which usually incorporate stringent conditions to protect the interests of the originator company) do not result in any significant expansion of access, since prices continue to remain beyond the reach of most citizens.

A case in point is Brazil, which tried to use price negotiations with multi-national pharmaceutical companies to bring down the price of patented HIV drugs. As a result, the price of Efiverenz (Merck) came down to  USD760 per person per year in 2003.  In contrast, when Efiverenz was brought under compulsory license in 2007, the price came down to USD170 per person per year – less than one fourth the negotiated price.

 

Similarly, a World Bank supported process of negotiated price decreases in Central America and the Caribbean in 2002 brought prices of HIV drugs down to USD 1100-1600 per patient per year. In contrast, 10 Latin American countries independently adopted an open competition-based model involving both generic manufacturers and originator companies, resulting in prices coming down from USD 5000 to USD 400 per patient per year.

 

The Government of Thailand, which began issuing compulsory licences in 2007, considered and dropped the option of negotiated price reductions, noting that “Prior negotiation with the patent holders is not an effective measure and only delays the improvement in access to
patented essential medicines and puts more lives in less healthy or
even dangerous situations.”

 

India plays a key role as a supplier of affordable medicines to other countries in the global south. Unlike negotiated prices, which apart from being unacceptably high would apply only in India, compulsory licensing of a drug like Trastuzumab would benefit millions of people across the developing world through global marketing of cheap generic versions.

 

The Campaign for Affordable Trastuzumab urges the Government of India to follow through on the strong political will it has shown by initiating the process of compulsory licensing for Trastuzumab. With 25,000 new cases of HER2+ breast cancer being recorded every year with most patients being young women, there is no time to waste. We look forward to a speedy notification and an accelerated process to bring biosimilars of Trastuzumab into the market.

 

We call on our policy-makers to ensure that big pharma companies do not continue to hold our health hostage to their greed for profits.

For further information, contact <kmenonsen@gmail.com> and <shailly.gupta@gmail.com>

 

Medicine, monopoly and malice: documentary on access to medicines ‘Fire in the Blood


 

POSTED BY ARADDHYA MEHTTA ON FEB 20TH, 2013 IN ACCESS TO MEDICINESHIV AND AIDS | 

Fire in the BloodA new documentary film opening in UK and Irish cinemas this week tells the story of what its makers call “the Crime of the Century” – how available low-cost antiretroviral medicine was blocked from reaching Africa and other parts of the global south in the years after 1996. The film signals the dangers of the increasingly-perilous outlook for access to essential medicine in developing countries.

Fresh from its much-talked-about premiere at the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah, last month, Fire in the Blood opens at the Irish Film Institute (IFI) in Dublin and the Prince Charles Cinema in London later this week. The film will be released in cinemas  across the UK on Monday 25th February.  The film tells a harrowing story of inhumanity and heroism, with a highly compelling cast of characters.  It details how it could come to pass that millions upon millions of people, primarily in Africa, were left to die horrible, painful deaths, while the drugs which could have saved them were being safely and cheaply produced and distributed just a short airplane ride away.

“I was curious to see what the reaction in the US would be”, says writer-director Dylan Mohan Gray.  “So much indoctrination about the necessity of high drug prices has gone on there that the Big Pharma Research & Development (R&D) defence is very much a sacred cow… even those with profound reservations about how the industry behaves tend to grudgingly accept its validity.  This is very easy for me to understand, since I was more or less that way myself when I began digging into all this.”  Gray was, however, gratified to discover that the American audiences who waited in line to attend six sold-out screenings at Sundance had much the same reaction after seeing the film that he had had when he began to work on the story.  “There is a very strong sense of betrayal when people find out what their governments have done in their name… and a very powerful conviction that the prevailing system of developing and commercialising medicine has to change”.

As the film points out, drug companies actually do very little basic research for drug discovery.  “84% of drug discovery research is funded by government and public sources”, says Gray, citing the landmark work of Professor Donald Light, “Pharmaceutical companies fund just 12% of such research, while the lion’s share of their spending goes into marketing and administration.”  These facts will come as little surprise to those familiar with the industry, but many have never really contemplated the repercussions of pricing essential medicines at levels only a tiny sliver of the world’s population can afford.

While the film tells the story of how multinational drug companies and the Western governments collaborated to keep low-cost generic AIDS drugs out of the hardest-hit countries at the height of the HIV/AIDS pandemic – at a cost of ten million or more lives – it also tells the fascinating story of the unlikely group of people which came together in order to try and break this blockade.  Among this number were front-line doctors, HIV-positive activists, generic drugmakers, intellectual property specialists and individuals of global stature such as Desmond Tutu and Bill Clinton (both interviewed in the film).  “That’s what really set this story apart for me”, says Gray.  “It was a real-life David versus Goliath tale, full of incredibly interesting, daring, courageous mavericks who took on the world’s most powerful companies and governments to do what virtually everyone else at the time said was impossible (i.e. mass treatment of HIV/AIDS in Africa), and against all odds they won…”

While the inspirational story of how low-cost generic AIDS drugs, first and foremost from India, came to save millions upon millions of lives in Africa (and beyond) is at the heart of FIRE IN THE BLOOD, the film concludes on a distinctly alarming note.  “The story this film tells was on the verge of being forgotten, something we can’t afford to let happen”, says Gray. The film details the tireless efforts of Western governments, working on behalf of industry, to impede and cut off supplies of affordable generic medicine from countries like India and Thailand to other parts of the global south, primarily by means of bi- and multilateral trade agreements which low- and middle-income countries are placed under enormous pressure to sign.

“The drug industry is stagnant, its pipeline is anemic and it has pinned all its future hopes on China and India”, notes Gray.  “Almost all these companies are publicly-traded, which means their bosses have to keep turning profits quarter-by-quarter if they want to try and keep their jobs… as they see it, they simply can’t afford to take a humanitarian view on issues of access.”  With the World Health Organisation having estimated that one-third of all deaths worldwide are attributable to treatable and preventable diseases, largely due to lack of access to medicine, the stakes could not be higher.

Meanwhile, for all its insistence that high prices are the only practical trade-off for an industry that spends so much money on R&D to find new and innovative medicines, Gray noted with a wry smile that the who’s who of senior pharma executives will be gathering in London for the industry’s can’t-miss event, the Pharma Summit, just a few days after FIRE IN THE BLOOD opens theatrically in the UK.  “I was amused, but not surprised, to read that the theme of this year’s summit is Should pharma cut its losses and get out of R&D?”.

Araddhya Mehtta is a global heath campaigner for Oxfam GB.

 

Ashis Nandy’s Predicament and Ours #JLF #FOE


January 30, 2013

For the past few days I have been preoccupied in one part of my mind in dealing with two reasons for anguish. The first reason has to do with the profound sense of disappointment and anger with which I heard Prof. Ashis Nandy, a man I consider to be a great teacher, friend and in possession of one of the finest minds of our time, commit himself in public to a flippant and vulgar position when speaking of the relationship between caste and corruption at the Jaipur Literary Festival.

I was saddened because Prof. Nandy’s statements do a great disservice to the suppleness and ethical integrity of his thinking, and represent one of those sadly paradoxical situations where an intellectual can become their own worst adversary. I am unambiguously critical of the Nandy who chooses to be pompously opinionated and misinformed at a forum like the Jaipur Literary Festival or while riding the hot-air currents of television especially because I remain a partisan of the Nandy who can be (when he chooses to be) one of the most thoughtful and insightful witnesses to our time in his writing.

The second reason for my anger has to do with the knee jerk reactions that have followed this episode, calling for Nandy’s prosecution and imprisonment, that come laden either with a disturbing sense of authoritarian rectitude emanating from the foot soldiers of identity politics and brokers of victimhood or with a degree of schaudenfraude from intellectual charlatans.

In all honesty, I cannot deny that Nandy’s remarks at the Jaipur Literary Festival reflect a profound lapse of judgement. As a person who claims to be a student of psychology among other things, I would urge Prof. Nandy, out of the solidarity and respect that I have for him to do some honest introspection and think about the conscious and unconscious habits of thought and affect that so speedily bring an invocation of caste, even when it is not immediately relevant, to the lips of our intellectuals. Corruption is a question of an unregulated access to power, or, a measure of the way in which the absence of a sustainable wage makes it necessary for millions of ordinary people to pursue informal economies and ways of life outside of or on the fringes of legality. A meditation on neither of these two polar phenomena necessarily requires us to weigh in on the caste identities of those who corrupt, or are corrupted by the ordinary operations of power and the economy in our society.

To say that ‘most of the corrupt are Dalits or come from backward communities’ is to say something as nonsensical as ‘most terrorists are Muslim’, or, ‘most people in the top echelons of right wing Hindu groups are Chitpavan Brahmins’ or ,’most of the financiers and speculators in global Capitalism are Jewish’, or ‘most of the people who were carriers of the HIV virus in the early days of the AIDS epidemic were homosexuals’.

First of all, such statements are of extremely dubious empirical value. They reflect the prejudice of the speakers and the spoken to more than they mirror facts on the ground. Secondly, even if they were to contain a modicum of truth – ‘yes, some of those caught for corruption have been Dalits, yes, some of those found guilty of terrorism are Muslim, yes, some of those who were early carriers of the HIV were gay, and yes, some of the leading plutocrats are Jewish and some of those involved in right wing Hindu fascism are Marathi speaking Brahmins’ stating them in bald terms necessarily involves the assertion of a falsehood, simply because there are always more counter factual instances that disprove each of the above assertions. For each X that is why Y ( here, for X, read an identity category – Dalit, Muslim, Gay, Jew, Brahmin etc. and for Y read an attribute – corrupt, terrorist, disease carrier, plutocrat, fanatic), there are way too many Xs that are also not Y for any correlation between X and Y to be meaningful. In fact no statements of this kind, or pretences to facticity of this nature actually tell us anything valuable about corruption, terrorism, AIDS, finance capital, or hindutva, or for that matter, about Dalits, Muslims, Jews, Gays or Brahmins.

They reflect instead a habit of inexactitude and imprecision that is indulged in Indian intellectual life, based on the easy anecdote, idle prejudice and plain statistical dissimulation, and deployed, casually, in passing as the currency of opinion, in may I add, largely male homosocial gatherings, where no one actually challenges anyone else. It reflects the sad fact that the mainstream of Indian intellectual life has not yet learnt to think beyond, below or besides identity based categories.

With regard to a discussion of corruption, the question of caste has a relevance insofar as the informally expressed networks of power and privilege are concerned, through which corruption operates – nepotism, for instance, in a specifically Indian context has to be read in terms of caste, because of the relationship between kinship, the closed structure of many affinity groups and affinal ties and caste structures in India. This is perhaps the territory that Ashis Nandy intended to step into when he began talking about corruption at the Jaipur Literary Festival. But a consideration on the matrix of privilege, informality and familiarity that comes with an assessment of how the wheels of corruption are greased – which is best represented by Nandy’s remark gesturing towards how elites reward and protect their own (which in all fairness cannot be read in an ‘anti-Dalit’ manner) does not necessarily translate into a quantitative assessment of which caste embodies how much corruption. That leap, I am afraid, takes us straight into a habitual, reflexive cast of thought that cannot articulate itself in terms other than those of caste. That intellectual failure, the rush to make a sweeping statement about millions of people, their intents, actions and motives is what disappoints me. If anything, a serious consideration on kinship, influence, caste and corruption would show that there is not a single caste, community, old boys network, professional sector, affinity group or vocation that is free of corruption in India. To single out any particular group or identity, for the purposes of a conversationally discursive rhetorical flourish, is to be utterly deluded, and to provide fuel to the purveyors of prejudice, even when the person doing so may not be prejudiced themselves.

The political theory that emanated from CSDS may well have said important things about the relationship between caste and electoral politics in parts of north India in the latter half of the twentieth century, but to have caste become the inevitable conceptual short-hand for any random feature of social, political or cultural life in India, shows us what happens when the contingent results of time bound quantitative surveys become intellectual fetishes that can be used to talk about any and everything in the name of a faux and au-fait indigeneity. Nandy’s profound error is not his alone, he is only the canary who sings in a predictable monotone as the conceptual mine shaft around him begins to cave in on itself. Perhaps there is no coal left in this particular seam.

What is particularly distressing to me is the fact that Nandy is actually at his best when he offers us the intellectual tools that help us critique the cults of empiricism, expertise and scientism. He is at his best when he speaks in riddles, enigmas and allegories. To see him pillory his own method at the altar of a vocabulary of ‘facts’ and ‘data’ is to see Nandy become the caricature of what he has most relentlessly criticised. Again, he is not alone in this. Great minds fall from great heights, and they fall hard. Let us not forget Martin Heidegger’s sinister Nazi period, Michel Foucault’s enthusiasm for the venality of the Islamist revolution in Iran, Hannah Arendt’s alleged abandonment of her principled anti-Zionism for the sake of a bizarre celebration (late in her life, and in private) of the military prowess of the Israeli state, Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s anti-semitism and Jean Paul Sartre’s disgusting apologetics for Stalinism. We need not be blind to any of this when we read and learn from the work of these intellectuals and writers, nor do we need to be blinded by it. Intellectuals are not infallible, and there is no need for us to be incredulous when an intellectual that we otherwise admire succumbs to an ethical or cognitive lapse that we cannot, and indeed must not ignore.

A robust commitment to the principles of free speech can reconcile trenchant intellectual disagreement with a passionate embodiment of the ethical defence of the liberty of that with which one disagrees. I am prepared to argue strongly in favour of the freedom of speech of those who are my bitter intellectual and ideological adversaries, not because I think they are all wonderful people but because I think we are left poorer as a society when we do not make room for contrarian points of view (even when they are profoundly disagreeable). I strongly believe we need to consign every single law in the statute that restricts the freedom of speech, whether on the grounds of offended religious sensibilities, caste sentiments or the sanctity or security of the state to the garbage bin.This needs to begin with a rejection of the first amendment to the Indian Constitution, and its infamous ‘reasonable restrictions’ clause, which is the fountainhead of every justification for the stifling of liberty. Whatever damage violent and hateful forms of speech do can in my opinion be effectively addressed by those legal instruments that define and target acts that are accessory to, or abet, the conduct of actual violence be it on casteist, sectarian or misogynist grounds. As for the specious argument of offended sentiments, especially on the grounds of religion, identity and honour, I maintain that a consistent and just application of this principle would also necessarily entail the potential prosecution of almost every religious believer because virtually every religion enshrines in its scripture hateful and damning sentiments regarding the believers of other religions, non-believers and those who undertake to lead forms of life, particularly in the intimate sphere that are not in conformity with religious dictates. My doubt may be as sacred and important to me as the faith of a believer. While I think that these sentiments (that damn those who are not of the right or sufficient faith) are provocations for us to think carefully about the relationship between prejudice, misogyny, homophobia and tradition, I would not think for a moment that the scriptures be banned or that religious figures be imprisoned for wanting to send the likes of me to hell, because there is a great deal in the same religious traditions that I am interested in and care for, even as an unbeliever. If I am, and millions of people like me are, prepared to live with the fact that our sentiments are offended on a daily basis by religion, then why must we not insist that we be returned the favour?

Because I am committed in principle to the freedom of speech, especially of the speech with I do not agree, or even disagree strongly, I do not think that Prof. Nandy’s words are sufficient ground for arrest or legal action. i must say here that even if someone made rank communal or casteist remarks, I would still not agree with them being ‘locked up’, ‘put away’ or gagged in any form. While I would urge everyone to either combat such speech, or deprive it of the oxygen of publicity by ignoring it, (even by means of a social boycott when necessary) under no circumstances would I endorse or call for punitive measures like a ban or imprisonment. The discomfort that some of the intellectuals who are currently standing in support of Nandy is something that I can recognise, but not sympathise with. It is this discomfort that makes them adopt several rhetorical contortions by means of which they are trying to either overlook or retroactively justify the import of his statement so that they can prove to themselves that he must not be banned or punished. This is the discomfort of those who have no issue as such with a mild climate of censorship (of the ‘reasonable restriction’ variety) but believe that someone like Nandy (one of ‘us’) ought not to be bound by it. Meaning they can perform the complex acrobatic manoeuvre of reconciling a mild hostility to free speech (in general) with an automatic endorsement of Nandy’s particular right to free speech because he is special. This is why they are making excuses for Nandy today. I make no excuses for Nandy. I do not believe that his words have not done damage. I do not think his is a special case that one should make exceptions for. I would defend him even if he was not a scholar of eminence, even if he was not someone I respected, or regarded as a friend. Even if he was a clear adversary, or an inhabitant of the widening constituency of right wing lunacy in this country. We have to learn to distinguish between different kinds of speech acts. Nandy’s words embody an opinion, a reactionary opinion, and must be confronted, immediately, with counter-speech, and vigorous, militant thinking, but they are not intended to act as a threat. On the other hand, when a Praveen Togadia or an Akbaruddin Owaisi, or a Varun Gandhi, or the family firm of the Thackerays call for the undertaking of acts that would involve physical harm or violence against particular communities, then, we can and indeed must consider whether or not the speech act itself constitutes the kind of violence that must be punished. Even at the sidelines of the Jaipur Literary Festival this year, there was a man, Kirori Lal Meena, an independent MP from Dausa, Rajasthan who loudly declaimed on television that he would personally beat up the women who he said were ‘drinking alcohol in the evenings at the festival’.

Now that is a threat, a clear statement of an intent to do or support physical harm being done to someone else for no good reason. That is the kind of speech that should make us think about whether or not to invoke the law.

The damage that Nandy’s flippancy has done on the other hand can be addressed only if we make room for stringent intellectual criticism and a demand for introspection, on everybody’s part. No amount of retrospective qualification can restore to the statements that Ashis Nandy made about caste and corruption, (or for that matter to the ones that he made just a little earlier endorsing the RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat’s bizarre two-nation theory of rape), any degree of ambiguity or irony. And the various attempts that I have seen by some of Delhi’s intelligentsia and commentariat at closing ranks around Nandy, by referring to his ‘maverick sense of humour’, his almost apparently zen master like ‘provocative intentions’ cannot take away from the intellectual and moral harm that a set of grossly incorrect statements pretending to facticity do when they are said with authority, and may I say, with an unnecessary degree of braggadocio. It is also not adequate in my view to say that these statements were made, as Nandy and some of those around him have been saying, in a context that was otherwise supportive of Dalits and other marginalised groups. Let us take this position for what it is worth and examine it closely. Basically, (and this is a generous interpretation if this position) what it implies is that the marginalised get ‘caught’ because they are not sophisticated or intelligent enough to develop strategies that would help them get away with it, like upper caste elites have long been accustomed to. There is something profoundly, vulgarly patronising about this attitude, that shades off into the snigger about the foibles of ‘simple people’ who can’t do better. I have no hesitation in saying that this needs to be called out, not because it is necessarily casteist, but because it is egregiously patronising.

I do not for a moment believe that Ashis Nandy is personally casteist. I know him to be an unorthodox and irreverent thinker who is deeply uncomfortable with any kind of intellectual protocol premised on hierarchy, and therefore, but naturally, is a trenchant critic of the actual operational existence of the caste system. But at the same time, like the Gandhi that Nandy admires, he is both a critic as well as a captive of the conceptual cage of caste. He may think against it, but he cannot think outside it. In doing so, he is on the same page with some amongst those who are calling for his punishment. They have spent their lives preventing themselves and others from thinking in terms other than those provided by the caste system, even if they have done so as its victims.

I know Nandy to be refreshingly egalitarian in his personal conduct, life and work practices. He has stood bravely in support of very radical positions, even when these positions have brought upon themselves the wrath of state fury or an angry majoritarian public consensus founded on negativity. One can only salute all of these attributes of his personality. But these facts do not in themselves absolve Nandy of the intellectual irresponsibility of his recent statements. While I strongly condemn any move to use the law to effect punitive measures against him, or to send him to prison even for day. I do believe that a refusal to be critical, and even harshly critical of his language and expression is irresponsible. The times that we live in require us not to be irresponsible in this way.

One of the finest statements that I have heard in the wake of this unfortunate episode has come from a person I find myself rarely in agreement with – the Dalit intellectual Chandrabhan Prasad. I heard him say on television (in conversation with Ashis Nandy and Barkha Dutton NDTV) that it is time to invoke ‘the great Dalit tradition of forgiveness’ while dealing with someone like Ashis Nandy. I agree with this view. Forgiveness involves a tacit admission of guilt on the part of the forgiver as well as the forgiven. First of all it means that both parties agree that the person who is to be forgiven has in fact done something wrong. One cannot forgive the innocent. And it does not evade the question of justice in the way that a anodyne invocation of reconciliation does. One need not ever be reconciled with the act that one chooses to forgive. Forgiveness is also a greater and more powerful instrument in the hands of the weak than the weapons of retribution. Forgiveness strengths the weak while doing away with weakness while retribution only redistributes weakness. Chandrabhan Prasad’s very intelligent deployment of the trope of forgiveness offers everybody, and especially the Dalit position, an opportunity to discover and flex its ethical strength, I hope it will be listened to.

The Bhagawad Gita opens with Arjuna’s predicament on the battlefield. He sees arrayed against him his teachers, his kin. And he says he does not want to take up arms against his teachers. This does not necessarily mean he is unaware of the harm that they have done. It only means that he is looking for a way other than violence or victory to confront their perfidy, because he is attached to them, because they mean something to him. Krishna’s counsel to Arjuna is well known, and I need not distract us with its details, but in essence it commands Arjuna to rise above his attachments in order to fight the war. I have never been satisfied with Krishna’s answer, while I remain fascinated by Arjuna’s question. Today, I find myself in the place of Arjuna, and in front of me is an acharya, a teacher who has done wrong. Perhaps the first thing to do is to invert the logic of the Bhagavad Gita, to insist on the ethical validity of one’s attachments, to think not against, but with desire in the pursuit of an ethical life. Doing this means being critical of the long tradition of renunciative abstraction as the engine of a meaningful life that includes not only Mohandas Gandhi but also some of his foremost interpreters today, including Ashis Nandy. It is to insist that one need not rise above or beyond the matrix of one’s attachments in order to fashion an ethical life. It is to find a language of criticism that is also the grammar of solidarity.

I hope that sense prevails, that Ashis Nandy is not sent to prison, so that we can roundly and thoroughly criticise him on intellectual grounds. Should the powers that be decide that a spell in prison is the only way their meagre imaginations can deal with this situation, I call upon everyone, regardless of whether they agree or disagree with Nandy to denounce such a move in the strongest, harshest terms because of its inherent authoritarianism. I also call upon us all to call for a thoroughgoing review of every repressive legal instrument in the constitution and criminal law, from the first amendment onwards, that restricts free speech.This country has already been shamed when it sent writers like Arundhati Roy or Varavara Rao to prison, or when it has banned or prohibited the work of M.F.Husain, Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasreen at the urging of bigots. If Ashis Nandy is sent to prison, we will once again find ourselves rightly accused of being the citizens of an illiberal, immature and closed society that is unable to live with difference.

Nandy himself has said that he will dance and write if he is sent to prison. I hope that he will dance and write even if he is at liberty. And I will happily dance with him, and read what he writes, and tell him while I do so, how wrong he has been in this instance, how profoundly exasperating he can be, and how much I love him. I believe that given half a chance, and had he been possessed of the intelligence and moral courage to defy Krishna that the situation warranted, that is what Arjuna would have done with Bhishma.

 

HIV in Chhattisgarh jails, debate over what caused it


Ashutosh Bhardwaj, Indian Express Nov 12, 2012

A nationwide health survey in jails has found 80 of Chhattisgarh’s prisoners HIV-positive, out of 13,000-odd tested. Prison authorities insist that the inmates had probably arrived already infected, but health authorities don’t rule out the possibility that it was after being jailed that they got infected, with unsafe sex or drug use the likely causes.

This has turned into a contentious issue. The health authorities are contemplating distribution of condoms and syringes, but the jail authorities say there is no reason to do so. Their resistance comes apparently because allowing distribution of condoms would amount to an acceptance of the fact that homosexuality exists in jails.

The 80 found HIV-positive include women prisoners too. “This is the first instance of an ELISA test being conducted in jails anywhere in India. Figures for none of the other states are available,” said S K Binjhwar, additional project director, Chhattisgarh Aids Control Society.

“Of these 80 prisoners, 65 have a CD4 count less than 350. They are being given ART. So far we have tested only those we suspected to be from a high-risk group, but since the infection also spreads to others in jails we are expanding our sample size,” he said. “We counsel them about safe sex.”

The jail administration says the health authorities should focus on sources of infection beyond prisons. “Instead of focusing on jails, the health authorities should focus on red-light areas and drug addicts and on improving the health situation at village level, especially checking quacks who use old syringes. These are the major sources of spreading HIV infection,” said ADG (jail) Giridhari Nayak.

“A jail has a mobile population, like a train. People board at a station and get off at the next. Only a few remain till the final destination,” Nayak added. “Of the total HIV-positive inmates in Chhattisgarh jails, only 12 are convicts while the rest are undertrials; they keep getting released and new ones come in. The infection comes from outside; it is not spreading in jails.”

Dr K K Gupta, Raipur jailor, said that the possibility of homosexual behaviour in jails “is merely hypothetical”. Gupta said, “There is no question of distributing condoms or syringes as such activities are yet to be seen in jails.”

Homosexuality in jails has been discussed globally and opinions have been sharply divided. A California study notes that the rate of HIV prevalence among people who are incarcerated is nearly seven times higher than that of the general population. San Francisco jail authorities installed a condom-vending machine on their premises after HIV infection was found to be rapidly spreading in the area in the 1990s.

In Chhattisgarh, the project began in March 2011, when the state AIDS control soc

 

UN wants prostitution decriminalized to help curb spread of HIV #sexwork


October 23rd, 2012 | News | 


By Gian C. Geronimo/GMANEWS - If the United Nations will have its way, soliciting sex or paying for it in the Asia and the Pacific region will no longer risk imprisonment.

In a recent report, the UN recommended the decriminalization of the world’s oldest profession to help curb the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, especially HIV.

“Removing legal penalties for sex work assists HIV prevention and treatment programmes to reach sex workers and their clients,” the UN said in its report titled “Sex Work and the Law in Asia and the Pacific.”

The Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, known to condemn prostitution, cannot be reached for comment on the subject, as the organization’s secretariat said the bishops authorized to talk about the issue are out of town on official business. But at least one bishop has blamed prostitution for the spread of HIV and has urged a crackdown on the illicit livelihood.

The UN report makes the opposite argument. By legalizing prostitution, the government can make sex work safer, extend health services to sex workers and thus slow the spread of the virus.

Malacañang, meanwhile, said in a briefing Friday that it will leave the issue of legalization of sex work to the country’s legislators.

“We have no comment. We would rather leave it to our legislators,” said deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte at a press briefing.

But Valte stressed that Philippine laws make prostitution in any form illegal. “Primarily, that’s illegal. Under our present laws that’s illegal which is why the LGUs are also in charge of cracking down and making sure that hindi lang doon sa establishments but rather people who traffic [are also apprehended].”

Susceptibility to HIV

The UN said the criminalization of sex-related jobs increases workers’ susceptibility to HIV by “fuelling stigma and discrimination, limiting access to sexual health services, condoms and harm reduction services; and adversely affecting the self esteem of sex workers and their ability to make informed choices about their health.”

The recommendation is also a move to stop the exploitation of sex workers and to give them basic rights by suggesting that their jobs, too, should have typical workplace standards in line with the law and government.

Decriminalization enables sex workers to organize within their communities and register their organizations, obtain identification documents so that they can fully access services and entitlements, engage in advocacy and respond to the health and safety needs of their peers,” the UN said.

The UN noted that, with the exception of New Zealand and the state of New South Wales in Australia, all countries in Asia and the Pacific criminalize sex work or associated activities.

In the Philippines, for one, sex work and soliciting sex work are illegal, as well as the establishment of brothels.

According to the Revised Penal Code, vagrancy is an offense, with the code defining prostitutes as vagrants. Sex workers caught may be fined up to six months in prison under the code’s vagrancy provision.

Valte said the government is continuously fighting prostitution and trafficking in the Philippines. “It is a point of concern which is why the IACAT (Inter-Agency Council Against Trafficking) continues to work on improving ‘yung mga conviction when it comes to trafficking in persons. We continue to work with—or the member-agencies in ensuring na nababawasan at mawawala po ‘yung mga ganitong kaso.”

Condoms

The UN study said in the Philippines, despite the government’s support for efforts to promote condom use among sex workers, many people in the sex industry still steer clear of condoms for fear that it may be used by the police as evidence against them once they are arrested.

The UN report referenced a 2003 study that found that many street-based sex workers refused free condoms offered by outreach workers because of the police issue.

“Police impeded their access to HIV prevention services by confiscating condoms, using possession of condoms as evidence of sex work, or arresting them for vagrancy,” the UN report said.

Ways to decriminalize sex work

The UN listed ways to decriminalize sex work.

“To enable the sex industry to be regulated as a legitimate form of work requires removal of the range of laws that criminalize activities associated with sex work, including removal of offences relating to soliciting, living on the earnings of sex work, procuring, pimping, the management and operation of brothels, and advertising,” it said.

Its report also debunked claims that countries in Asia and the Pacific where sex work is illegal have low HIV rates and prevented the epidemic to spread among sex workers and their clients.

In fact, the study said evidence suggests areas that decriminalized sex work have “very high” condom use rates and increased access to sexual health services. —

with Patricia Denise Chiu/KBK/RSJ/HS, GMA News

HIV and the Law-Risks, Rights & Health


Thursday, 25 October 2012, IFHHRO

Earlier this year, the Global Commission on HIV and the Law published a report presenting the available evidence on human rights and legal issues relating to HIV: HIV and the Law: Risks, Rights & Health.

The Global Commission on HIV and the Law consisted of fourteen individuals who advocate on issues of HIV, public health, law and development. Some of the Commission’s findings include:

  • 123 countries have legislation to outlaw discrimination based on HIV, and 112 legally protect at least some populations based on their vulnerability to HIV. However, these laws are often ignored or badly enforced.
  • In over 60 countries it is a crime to expose another person to HIV or to transmit it, especially through sex. At least 600 individuals living with HIV in 24 countries have been convicted under HIV-specific or general criminal laws.
  • In many countries, the law dehumanises many of those at highest risk for HIV: sex workers, transgender people, men who have sex with men (MSM), people who use drugs, prisoners and migrants. Rather than providing protection, the law renders these “key populations” all the more vulnerable to HIV. The criminalisation of sex work, drug use and harm reduction measures create climates in which civilian and police violence is rife and legal redress for victims impossible.
  • 78 countries make same-sex activity a criminal offence, with penalties ranging from whipping to execution.
  • A growing body of international trade law and the over-reach of intellectual property (IP) protections are impeding the production and distribution of low-cost generic drugs. IP protection is supposed to provide an incentive for innovation but experience has shown that the current laws are failing to promote innovation that serves the medical needs of the poor. The fallout from these regulations—in particular the TRIPS framework—has exposed the central role of excessive IP protections in exacerbating the lack of access to HIV treatment and other essential medicines.

Reason for hope

Notwithstanding these problems, the Commission has found reason for hope: “There are instances where legal and justice systems have played constructive roles in responding to HIV, by respecting, protecting and fulfi lling human rights. To some such an approach may seem a paradox—the AIDS paradox. But compelling evidence shows that it is the way to reduce the toll of HIV.” Examples given are police cooperation with community workers who assist sex workers; the promotion of harm reduction programmes for injecting drug users; effective legal aid for people living with HIV; and court actions and legislative initiatives promoting the rights of sexual minorities, women and young people. Despite international pressures to prioritise trade over public health, some governments
and civil society groups are using the law to ensure access to affordable medicines, while exploring new incentives for medical research and development.

The report is available in English, Spanish,French and Russian.

Download HIV and the Law: Risks, Rights & Health

 

Asian countries act to get cheap drugs #rightohealth


SouthViews

No. 37, 22 October 2012
SOUTHVIEWS is a service of the South Centre to provide opinions and analysis of topical issues from a South perspective.
Visit the South Centre’s website: www.southcentre.org.

Staring with Malaysia in 2003, many Asian countries are now taking actions to promote cheaper medicines through compulsory licensing, with Indonesia being the latest case
………………………………………………………………

By Martin Khor

By Martin Khor
Recent government actions by Indonesia and India to issue compulsory licenses are extending the trend in Asia to increase access to cheaper medicines to treat serious ailments, especially HIV/AIDS, cancer and hepatitis B.

The supply of generic medicines, either through import or local production, has been the major method of reducing prices and making the drugs affordable to more people.

When the required medicines are patented, which usually results in high prices,   governments are allowed by the WTO rules to issue a compulsory license to enable themselves or private companies to import or produce generic versions, which usually cost much less.

In 2003, Malaysia became the first developing country to issue a compulsory license to a local firm to import drugs to treat HIV-AIDS from India.  The cheaper generic drugs enabled the government to treat many more patients within the same budget.

Following this, Indonesia in 2004 issued a Presidential decree enabling the production of a some HIV-AIDS drugs while Thailand in 2007 issued compulsory licenses for several HIV-AIDS and cancer drugs.

In March this year, India approved its first compulsory license enabling a local company to produce a generic version of an anti-cancer drug, which could reduce the price of treating kidney and liver cancer from US$5,200 a month (the price of the branded product) to $160 a month (the price of the generic product).

The latest measure was taken on 3 September by Indonesian President Dr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono who issued a decree which has the effect of a compulsory license.  It enables local manufacturers to make, import and sell generic versions of seven patented drugs used for treating HIV-AIDS and hepatitis B.

The decree said that in line with the urgent need to control HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis B in Indonesia, “it is necessary to continue and expand the access policies to provide access to antiviral and anti-retroviral medicines still protected by patent.”

This is the third time Indonesia has issued a set of compulsory licenses. The latest decree stated that the 2004 and 2007 decrees were no longer sufficient to implement the policies.

The compulsory license is aimed at significantly reducing the prices of these life-saving medicines and making them accessible to thousands more Indonesian patients.

“We will ensure the availability of good-quality, safe and effective generic versions of anti-retroviral and anti-viral drugs,” said HM Subuh, infectious disease control director at the Indonesian Health Ministry, as quoted in the Jakarta Post of 19 October.

According to the decree, the generic companies would have to pay a royalty of 0.5% of the net sales value of the generic drugs to the companies that own the patents, such as Merck, Glaxo SmithKline, Bristol Myers Squibb, Abbott and Gilead.

The first decree in 2004 enabled cheaper generic medicines that provided HIV-infected patients with first-line anti-retroviral therapy.  However, these have become ineffective or less effective because of increasing resistance or the lower safety of the drugs.

The latest decree enables the supply of generic anti-retroviral products for not only better first but also second-line anti-retroviral therapy.

“With the 2012 regulation, we obviously can improve access to quality but affordable drugs,” Maura Linda Sitanggang, the Health Ministry’s Director General for Pharmaceuticals and Medical Equipment, told The Jakarta Post. “We’re using this mechanism concerning public interest on the production of quality but affordable medicines to treat HIV and HBV.”

The seven medicines which are the subject of the compulsory license (known in this case as for “government use”) are efavirenz, abacavir, didanosin, lopinavir + ritonavir combination, tenofovir, tenofovir + emtricitabine, and tenofovir + emtricitabine + efavirenz.

All the drugs are used to treat HIV-AIDS.  The drug tenofovir (brand name Viread produced by patent holder Gilead) is also used to treat hepatitis B, which affects 13 million people in Indonesia.  It had been approved in the United States for treating HIV-AIDS in 2001 and for treating chronic Hepatitis B in 2008.

The combination drug tenofovir + emtrisitabin (brand name Truvada, produced by Abbot) is taken in a single dose once a day.  It has been used to treat HIV-AIDS and in July 2012 it also became the first drug approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use as a preventive measure, to reduce the risk of HIV infection to people at high risk of infection including those who may engage in sex with HIV infected patients.

The Indonesian decree was the second compulsory license in Asia this year.

In India, the Patent Office in March approved the country’s first compulsory license to a local firm Natco Pharma to make a generic version of the cancer drug sorofenib tosylate (brand name Nexavar, produced by Bayer).

It was argued that at the high price of 2.8 lakh rupees (US$5,200) for a month’s dosage of Nexavar, only 200 patients were treated in India in a year.  Natco said that 8,000 people would need the drug, and it could supply a generic version at 8,800 rupees (US$160) for a month’s treatment.

The drug is used to treat advanced kidney and liver cancer.  According to the terms of the license, Natco would pay Bayer royalties of 6% of its net sales.

Bayer challenged the compulsory license and on 16 September the Intellectual Property Appellate Board rejected its petition, ruling that “If a stay is granted it will jeopardise the interests of the public who are in need of the drug.”

Other developing regions have also been making use of the compulsory license option in the WTO’s intellectual property treaty known as TRIPS.  They include Brazil and Ecuador in Latin America and Kenya, Zambia and Zimbabwe in Africa.

In 2001, the WTO’s Ministerial Conference in Doha adopted a TRIPS and Public Health Declaration that asserted that the TRIPS Agreement does not and should not prevent Members from taking measures to protect public health.

It affirmed that the Agreement should be interpreted in a manner supportive of the right to health and access to medicines for all.

The Declaration clarified:  “In this connection, we reaffirm the right of WTO Members to use, to the full, the provisions in the TRIPS Agreement, which provide flexibility for this purpose.”

Table: Active Substance Name, Name of Patent Holder, Patent Number, and Duration of Patents for Antiviral and Antiretroviral Medicines
 

NO. NAME OF ACTIVE SUBSTANCES NAME OF PATENT
HOLDERS
PATENT NUMBER DURATION OF
PATENT
1. Efavirenz Merck & Co., INC ID 0005812 Until the end of patent period,
August 7, 2013
2. Abacavir Glaxo Group
Limited
ID 0011367 Until the end of
patent period, May 14, 2018
3. Didanosin Bristol – Myers
Squibb Company
ID 0010163 Until the end of
patent period, August 6, 2018
4. Combination Lopinavir and
Ritonavir
Abbott
Laboratories
ID 0023461 Until the end of
patent period, August 23, 2018
5. Tenofovir Gilead Sciences,
Inc.
ID 0007658 Until the end of
patent period, July
23, 2018
6. Combination Tenofovir and
EmtrisitabinCombination Tenofovir, Emtrisitabin and Evafirenz
Gilead Sciences, Inc. ID P0029476 Until the end of
patent period, 3
November 2024