ABSTRACT
A law is valuable not because it is law, but because there is right in it. Henry Ward Beecher
Introduction
With the review of the global governance regime of the WTO and the TRIPS’ textual exibilities, it is apparent that without further legislative activity, the common law has arguably graver consequences for national regulatory responses than does TRIPS. This must be adequately addressed along with a critical review of the patent administration system for compliance with a state’s obligation to its citizens on fundamental human rights (HR). Until recently, HR rarely entered the fray or were considered as part of the broader costs of national and international patent laws. Where critical patent review occurred, it was traditionally intent on improving the incentives for achieving more optimal industrial and economic policy. Biotech’s far reaching promises, however, have had the ironic effect of drawing attention to the limitations on delivery of such promises that biopatent disequilibria foster while highlighting the individual HR costs of a utilitarian based proprietary regime. The HR dimension of patent law and policy can therefore no longer be ignored. Governments must respond by taking appropriate action and may need to be reminded of their HR obligations to do so. Now trade-related, patent policy need not take priority over health policy or other policy arenas affecting individual rights. This chapter reviews the nexus of trade-related IPRs with HR and thereby seeks to complete the review of the institutional and historical evolution of the trade and HR regimes, and to further demonstrate the complementarity of their reciprocal objectives in global governance.
