23 April 2001

Text: United States Abstains from Vote on AIDS Drugs Resolution

The United States abstained April 23 from the vote on a resolution intended to improve access to drugs for treatment of HIV/AIDS. At the Geneva meeting of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Brazil offered the resolution entitled "Access to Medication in the Context of Pandemics such as HIV/AIDS."

Ambassador George E. Moose, the U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations in Geneva, said the measure was "flawed" and amounted to "bad public health policy." If its recommendations were implemented, Moose added, they could prove extremely harmful to collaborative international efforts to combat HIV/AIDS.

The United States was the only member of the 53-nation Commission on Human Rights to abstain from the vote on resolution L-50, which was adopted with 52 in favor.

Explaining the U.S. decision to abstain, Moose said the resolution appeared "to question the validity of internationally agreed protections of intellectual property rights."

"In so doing, it could well have the unintended consequence of discouraging investment in the important research desperately needed to find the cures of the future," he said. " Nor does this resolution consider the potential for other unintended consequences, including the emergence of more vigorous and drug resistant forms of the HIV virus. Simply put, this is bad public health policy."

The following is the text of the statement by Ambassador Moose:

Ambassador George Moose
U.S. Delegation, UN Commission on Human Rights

Explanation of Vote: L.50
Access to Medication in the context of pandemics such as HIV/AIDS

Mr. Chairman:

The United States is strongly committed to addressing the AIDS pandemic internationally, including access to treatment and care. For that reason, we worked hard with Brazil and other delegations to try to come to agreement on an acceptable text. We certainly understand and appreciate the sentiments that have motivated this initiative. We very much regret, however, that, despite extensive dialogue regarding this very complex issue, we are unable to join consensus on this text.

From the perspective of good public health practice, we believe that this resolution is flawed in a number of ways.

As written the resolution would limit the rights of States to set priorities within their national policies and strategies for dealing with such pandemics. We believe that States must have the latitude to develop balanced strategies that include prevention, counseling and related support services, as well as care, including access to drugs.

We note that UNAIDS - the UN's umbrella organization for responding to the HIV/AIDS crisis - was established to de-medicalize HIV/AIDS and to focus on the need for a multi-dimensional approach to this pandemic. It is clear that an over-emphasis on use of pharmaceuticals, no matter how well intentioned, detracts from the more fundamental need for primary prevention.

HIV/AIDS is a horrible disease. Once started, medicines must be used consistently day after day after day for the rest of a patient's life. If stopped, when the patient feels better, the disease returns very strongly. Therefore, for treatment to be effective, it is essential that states put in place the infrastructure to ensure that anti-retrovirals are used appropriately.

The resolution calls into question the legitimate responsibility of national governments to assure the effectiveness and safety of pharmaceutical products for use in pandemics. Further, it appears to question the validity of internationally agreed protections of intellectual property rights. In so doing, it could well have the unintended consequence of discouraging investment in the important research desperately needed to find the cures of the future. Nor does this resolution consider the potential for other unintended consequences, including the emergence of more vigorous and drug resistant forms of the HIV virus. Simply put, this is bad public health policy.

This resolution is, in essence, a flawed health document, not a human rights document. Complex health matters are best dealt with by the UN organization that has the technical competence in those matters -- the World Health Organization. The 191 member states that comprise the World Health Assembly will be meeting here in Geneva in three weeks time, and both HIV/AIDS and WHO's Revised Drug Strategy will be on the agenda. That is the most appropriate venue for health matters.

My government is also concerned by references which appear to be aimed at creating a new category of rights, such as the reference to the right to the "highest attainable standard of physical and mental health." The United States does not support the creation of legally enforceable entitlements or the establishment of judicial or administrative remedies at the national or international levels to adjudicate such presumed rights.

The U.S. Government is the world's leading provider of international assistance for the purpose of providing that people living with HIV/AIDS receive treatment and care, including pharmaceuticals. We have played a leading role in the development of international strategies to combat the scourge of this disease. We cannot, however, support a flawed resolution whose unintended consequences could prove extremely harmful to our collective efforts.

For these reasons, and others, my delegation will abstain in the vote on this resolution.

Thank you.

End Text