India today accused the US of taking "unilateral measure" to pressurise countries to accept Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) protection beyond WTO obligations.
On April 30, the US has brought out the Special 301 report, an annual review of the global state of IPR protection and enforcement, in which it has classified India as a 'priority watch list country'.
"The Special 301 process is a unilateral measure taken by the US under their Trade Act, 1974 to create pressure on countries to increase IPR protection beyond the TRIPS agreement.
"It is an extra territorial application of the domestic law of a country and is not tenable under the overall WTO regime," Commerce and Industry Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said in a written reply to the Rajya Sabha.
She said that India has a well established legislative, administrative and judicial framework to safeguard IPR which meets its obligations under the Agreement on Trade Related IPRs (TRIPS) while utilising the flexibilities provided in the international regime to address its developmental concerns.
The concern identified in the USA's report are based on the inputs provided by the American industry on their perception of the level of protection provided by India to Intellectual Property.
Issues that have been flagged in the report include, concerns over the provision of section 3(d) of the Patent Act, compulsory license (CL), inclusion of a statement relating to CL for green technologies in India's National Manufacturing Policy and challenges relating to enforcement of IP Rights.
Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act 1970 does not allow patent to be granted to inventions involving new forms of a known substance unless it differs significantly in properties with regard to efficacy.
"Thus, the Indian Patent Act does not allow ever-greening of patents. This is a cause of concern to the US pharma companies," she said.
India has always maintained its IPR regime is fully compliant with all international laws and that it would drag the US to the WTO's dispute settlement mechanism if it takes any adverse unilateral step against the country in IPR-related matters.
The Obama administration had been strongly criticising India's investment climate and IPR laws, especially in the pharmaceutical and solar sectors.
