20,000 Petitioners Seek Impeachment Of Thai Health Minister

[george]

20,000 petitioners seek impeachment of Thai health minister

BANGKOK: -- Representatives of consumer and patient's rights groups petitioned Thailand's Speaker of the Senate Friday, presenting him with documents calling on the upper house to conduct impeachment proceedings against the Minister of Public Health for siding with pharmaceutical companies rather than the kingdom's poor who cannot afford expensive medications.

Chaiya Sasomsap is the first minister targeted since the elected government led by the People Power Party took office in early February.

Saree Ongsomwang, manager of the Foundation for Consumers, submitted a name list of 20,000 eligible

voters to the Senate Speaker Prasobsuk Boondet seeking removal of Mr. Chaiya, citing his decision to

review the compulsory licensing (CL) enforcement on key cancer drugs and his unfair transfers of senior officials as being among the major reasons behind their move.

Senate Speaker Prasopsuk pledged to quickly proceed with the impeachment proceedings in accordance with law, saying that the upper chamber needs at least 10 days to examine and crosscheck the estimated 20,000 signatures on the list with the Interior Ministry before sending the case to the National Counter Corruption Commission.

The campaign for his removal gathered speed despite Mr. Chaiya's announcement earlier this month

that the ministry would maintain the previous government's CL policy on key cancer drugs after being

subject to heavy criticism from patients and non-governmental organisations both locally and internationally.

Saree claimed the minister's public announcement reviewing the CL had caused substantial damage to

the state coffers, transferring some ministry officials who had been working to protect national interest and

issuing new orders which are obstacle to national healthcare reform.

The present Constitution stipulates that 20,000 eligible voters can seek impeachment proceedings against political office holders.

The military-appointed government, which came to power in the September 2006 coup, imposed CLs last year on the heart medication Plavix and two AIDS drugs – Efavirenx and Kaletra. Outgoing public health minister Mongkol Na Songkhla the issued another batch of patent-sidestepping CL decisions for four cancer medicines – Imanitib, Letrozole, Docetaxel and Erlotinibas.

But on assuming office as the new government's Public Health Minister, Mr. Chaiya immediately ordered a review of the CL process, saying that the plan could harm Thailand's trade with Western countries whose pharmaceutical giants hold the key drug patents.

--TNA 2008-03-28

[sriracha john]

20,000 petitioners seek impeachment of Thai health minister

BANGKOK: -- Representatives of consumer and patient's rights groups petitioned Thailand's Speaker of the Senate Friday, presenting him with documents calling on the upper house to conduct impeachment proceedings against the Minister of Public Health

--TNA 2008-03-28

This thread is a natural continuation of the New Cabinet Appointed thread in that it could be retitled: New Cabinet Impeached

Journalist Associations Plan to Launch Impeachment against PM's Office Minister

The National Press Council agrees with the campaign by two professional Press Associations to impeach the Prime Minister's Office Minister in charge of supervising state mass media agencies, for meddling in their management.

The current freedom of press situation was on the agenda at yesterday's meeting by the National Press Council as proposed by the Press Association of Thailand and the Thai Broadcasting Journalist Association.

The discussion over the matter came about as the PM's Officer Minister, Jakrapob Penkair, hinted that the MCOT President, Wasant Paileeklee, should be sacked.

The Minister also set up a sub-panel to investigate Wasanat and ordered the Public Relations Department to recall its concessions for the frequencies of five private-run radio stations.

Jakropob's moves may be seen as violations of the 2007 Constitution and his conduct could be considered an intervention in the mass media society that is protected by the Constitution.

At the meeting, it was cited that though Jakrapob is assigned to supervise state agencies related to public relations, he has authority only to oversee the overall picture of their policies while the responsibility of management is under the responsibility of civil servants and related agencies.

Therefore Jakarapob's order asking the MCOT President to review himself and his instructing the agency's executive board to change its President are seen as an attempt to sack an official or staff of a state-run enterprise, which violates Article 268 of the Constitution.

His order instructing the Public Relations Department to recall the frequency of five radio stations and call for a meeting with its operators are considered attempts to meddle in the work of civil servants, which also violates Article 268.

Such unconstitutional moves could result in Jakrapob's status as a Cabinet member being nullified. Senators and MPs are allowed to submit a petition with the Constitution Court asking for his impeachment.

At the meeting it was therefore agreed to support any campaign by the Thai Broadcasting Journalist Association and the Press Association of Thailand that aims to protect the rights to express opinions and the freedom of the press.

- Thailand Outlook / 3-28-08

Edited March 28, 2008 by sriracha john

[sriracha john]

The disastrous outcome for this New Cabinet (as linked above) that was predicted by so many different posters early on in that thread and that run through out it, has come to past.

Not many, however, thought it would come so quickly....

Edited March 28, 2008 by sriracha john

[geriatrickid]

1.Representatives of consumer and patient's rights groups petitioned

2. citing his decision to review the compulsory licensing (CL) enforcement on key cancer drugs and

3.his unfair transfers of senior officials as being among the major reasons behind their move.

1. mmmkay. So no allegation of incompetence or professional malfeasance, just that consumer groups and patient's rights groups are unhappy. Fair enough, but when consumer groups in other countries are upset with a health ministry decision or position they try and work with the ministry to address the impact. These patients rights groups sure were awfully quiet when it came to protecting frontline care and privacy, prior to this minister. Methinks there is some manipulation going on. Wonder where some of the financing for these groups is now coming from. Is it just speculation to believe that certain manufacturers and others that had a financial benefit at stake from the imposed licensing want this fight to occur. Impossible, you say as these folks are motivated only by the common good, right? You think the cops are corrupt? You've never seen the amount of industrial espionnage and scullduggery that goes on in the pharma industry.

2. Don't suppose anyone wants to consider the possibility that proprietary pharmaceutical companies have said, ok, if you take our intellectual capital without fair compensation to reflect the risks and monies invested, we are not making available the other drugs in which we have invested billions. It's a squeeze play and the government doesn't have much room to negotiate. Innovative drugs are being priced to reflect the current environment for the manufacturers. Those drugs that are in short supply are going to those countries that are paying for them.

3. A toss in to provide a nice distraction? I think it makes great copy. Too bad it's short on substance. There are quite a few new faces injected into the ministry that have appropriate academic credentials and work experience.

[Plus]

no allegation of incompetence or professional malfeasance, just that consumer groups and patient's rights groups are unhappy

That's simply another way to spin it. They aren't unhappy without a reason, and they aren't just consumers either - the attempt is spearheaded by the Rural Doctors society, I believe.

His decision to cancel CL has been reversed already, so there's no reason to start "the sky is falling" argument all over again. None of the dire predictions came true, we actually have Chinese here studying how to implement CL there.

There was also a hiccup with Indian manufacturer that cancelled generic drugs contract after Minister's unilateral decision.

All in all it was stupid move and it backfired badly. What else did you really expect from second rate ministers with no credentials who are only interested in protecting big business, public health minister, nonetheles? That's the same <deleted> that thinks that Yob-amrung is a very nice, polite smoker, drinker, and pub brawler to make him a role model for Thai youth.

[geriatrickid]

That's simply another way to spin it. They aren't unhappy without a reason, and they aren't just consumers either - the attempt is spearheaded by the Rural Doctors society, I believe.

His decision to cancel CL has been reversed already, so there's no reason to start "the sky is falling" argument all over again. None of the dire predictions came true, we actually have Chinese here studying how to implement CL there.

There was also a hiccup with Indian manufacturer that cancelled generic drugs contract after Minister's unilateral decision.

All in all it was stupid move and it backfired badly. What else did you really expect from second rate ministers with no credentials who are only interested in protecting big business, public health minister, nonetheles? That's the same <deleted> that thinks that Yob-amrung is a very nice, polite smoker, drinker, and pub brawler to make him a role model for Thai youth.

Not exactly. The rural doctors do have a legitimate concern, no doubt about that, but several groups with a political agenda are tagging along for the ride. The rural physicians have other issues and drugs are not the sole issue. Some of their concerns are in respect to the quality of care available in rural areas and their pay. (It is an issue common to other countries such as Australia and Canada). It is a valid concern and I think it is of greater importance than the drug issue.

The sky is not falling, but perhaps you might wish to check the price lists and availability of various medications, particularly those that relate to new cancer treatments or for metabolic disorders. The new minister's position on the matter was under study in the previous government and he basically inherited a hot potato. Much like the new president of the USA will inherit Pres. Bush's economic catastrophe. If you have confidence in Chinese and Indian drug manufacturers, by all means use their products. I do not share the same faith in their QC. Consumers do not see the hidden costs of purchasing solely on cost. Let me give you an example from Canada. One province's hospital buying group was intent on securing the best prices for scalpels. That meant switching from US and European suppliers to India. The quality seemed great until the blades started breaking off in patients. Would you be surprised if I stated that the scalpels were somewhat untraceable?

I'm a great believer in generics. However, I steer clear of those that originate in India and China. For the most part, the products usually work, but many of us believe that the greater margin of error associated with the products which can result in fatalities or complications is not justified by the cost savings. QC and the ability to trace every ingredient in the manufacture of a drug or medical device is an expensive proposition. Many of the lower cost suppliers can not guarantee the integrity of the supply chain.

As for your comment on big business, the alternative suppliers are big business too and there is lots of money to be made by some of the people that are pushing this dispute from the shadows. It's not black and white.

[Plus]

The difference with your scalpel example is that 99% of Thai patients do not use patented drugs in the first place, and never will. It's either generics or nothing.

Indians are doing business, too, but you can't put them in the same league yet. And if they ever reach that status, there will be someone else to take the place of a cheap supplier.

>>>>

Which politically motivated groups do you have in mind? NGOs working with HIV patients? I'm not aware of any political links in this case. Who are they linked to? PAD? Democrats? Opposing factions in PPP?

[geriatrickid]

The difference with your scalpel example is that 99% of Thai patients do not use patented drugs in the first place, and never will. It's either generics or nothing.

Indians are doing business, too, but you can't put them in the same league yet. And if they ever reach that status, there will be someone else to take the place of a cheap supplier.

>>>>

Which politically motivated groups do you have in mind? NGOs working with HIV patients? I'm not aware of any political links in this case. Who are they linked to? PAD? Democrats? Opposing factions in PPP?

Where do you get the 99% number from? My statement which referenced metabolic disorders and cancer therapy was based upon the fact that almost all of the drugs used are proprietary in respect to innovative treatment regimes.

You reference NGOs, which ones? There are thousands in Thailand as many are Thai community based organizations if you use the strict definition. Out of all of those NGO's only a small number have any direct involvement with the treatment of HIV patients. That's not a slap at the NGOs, just a recognition of the fact that HIV patients receiving treatment are neither lucrative nor beneficial to the fundraising mechanisms of large multinational NGOs. The opinion that counts for me is the WHO's position on Thailand's generic drugs. Last time I looked, it did not recommend the use of these drugs outside of Thailand. Look up the reasons why. Would you believe me if I told you there are serious questions as to the efficacy and bioequivalency of these generics with the proprietary versions? Is it not true that Thai patients receiving these generics suffer more complications, ADRs and require more secondary treatments than do patients not on the HIV treatment generics? What we have in Thailand is an incubator of resistant viruses and bacteria because of a quickfix approach to long term problems. The military junta should have been funding healthcare instead of cutting its budget while increasing the military's budget.

There was an easy solution to slashing the drug prices. Thailand could have done what Canada did and employed differential pricing and bulk discounts. It could have also addressed the trade barriers created by the tariffs on the drugs. Generics could have been made in conjunction with the patent holders as is done in Europe and Canada. Had that strategy been followed, the costs of drugs could have been cut significantly without any of the political BS.