You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

March 14, 2012

Towards Greater Harmonisation – The View from Southeast Asia

Subscribe to Updates
World Intellectual Property Review

The 10 nation members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have committed to implement an ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) by 2015. As of January 1, 2010, with the full implementation of the ASEAN Free Trade Agreement (now called the ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement), the trading bloc has created a single market of more than 600 million people, making it the world’s ninth largest economy, with a GDP growth of 7.5 percent.

Foreign direct investment into ASEAN rose to $76 billion in 2010, doubling the 2009 level. Comparisons to EU economic integration are frequent, but unlike that merged economy, ASEAN lacks singular regulation and harmonised rules and regulations. Among the key challenges posed by integration, ASEAN members will need to implement an effective system for the registration, enforcement and commercialisation of intellectual property (IP) within the AEC.

Current plan

Although the development of IP laws and enforcement mechanisms differ from one member state to another, ASEAN recognises the importance of effective IP policy, which must be consistently implemented in all member states. In 1995, ASEAN adopted the IP Rights Action Plan, which provides a framework for establishing effective IP policy in the region. The ASEAN Working Group on IP Cooperation (AWGIPC) was commissioned to oversee development of the action plan. The first phase of implementation ran from 2004 to 2010, and was aimed at IP creation efforts, public recognition and awareness of IP concepts and setting up regional enforcement frameworks.

The second phase of the action plan (from 2011 to 2015) is aimed at transforming ASEAN into an innovative and competitive region through the use of IP. In addition to carrying on from the three goals of the first phase, the second phase has addressed additional issues of IP harmonisation at the IP office level and the preparation for member states’ participation in global IP systems.

In light of this, significant improvements can be expected in the IP field within the next few years. For each type of IP, the AEC harmonisation may have several implications for protection, use and enforcement of an IP asset. In particular, the implications for trademarks, patents, and copyright are likely to have the largest impact on businesses in the region.

Trademarks

The AEC harmonisation plan for trademarks will be based primarily on the Madrid Protocol. Unlike the EU model, ASEAN’s integration plan for trademarks does not currently include a Community Trademark (CTM) scheme. According to the action plan, ASEAN members are required to accede to the Madrid Protocol by 2015. At present, only Singapore and Vietnam are members of the Madrid Protocol. Thailand has been working toward accession for several years, and is expected to join by 2015.

Patents

Importantly, the AEC envisions that all countries will become members of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) by 2015. Currently, four ASEAN member states have not joined (Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar). Member states are charged with the responsibility to issue appropriate guidelines for PCT implementation in their country, and to amend any relevant legislation. AEC IP harmonisation strongly advocates implementation of the ASEAN Patent Examination Cooperation (ASPEC) system. It is hoped that the system will be fully operational by 2012, and will be used for 5 percent of all patent applications at this time. Other plans include the establishment of a regional network of at least 20 regional patent libraries to increase access to global scientific information.

Patent office capacity building is a specific AEC IP harmonisation goal, with training programmes for patent examiners to feature heavily in coming years. Various international patent offices have committed to providing training and best practice recommendations, with ASEAN patent examiners receiving training in neighbouring patent offices. Of note is plant variety protection, with Singapore and Vietnam, which have joined the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV), expected to share their experience to help other member states bring their plant variety protection regimes up to international standards.

Copyright

Copyright harmonisation has received less emphasis than has been given to trademarks or patents, but it does feature in the action plan, with member states encouraged to undertake studies on the contributions of copyright industries to their economies and then share those conclusions with other members, including uniform recordal procedures. Thailand is taking the lead under the AEC in sharing information on how to build and operate collecting societies for effective use of copyright.

Conclusion

ASEAN IP offices have for years faced difficulties such as outdated office infrastructures, insufficiently trained examiners, tremendous backlogs of patent and trademark applications and, of course, rampant IP infringement. The AEC is striving to develop the necessary framework for regional cooperation in many areas of IP. The framework goals, if met, will not only improve regional cooperation, but will achieve harmonisation on some legal facets of IP and will help to bring many IP regimes up to best practice international standards. This will allow stakeholders in the member states to capitalise better on their untapped IP assets and, we hope, serve as a catalyst to improve innovation and encourage technological solutions to what are certain to be daunting, yet exciting, challenges to a rising integrated economy.

ASEAN FDAs – A harmonisation model for IP?

While harmonisation of IP registration systems within the 10 nations of ASEAN may be a few years in the making, regional Food & Drug Administrations (FDAs) and Departments of Agriculture have already begun to streamline and harmonise registration procedures.

Cosmetics. On January 1, 2008, ASEAN member states implemented the ASEAN Harmonization Cosmetics Regulation Scheme. As a result, a streamlined system and an efficient registration process have replaced the previously chaotic system, and there is now just a solitary category for cosmetic products.

Pharmaceuticals. While currently each local FDA has different requirements for registering pharmaceutical products in each ASEAN country, the pharmaceutical industry is leading the way for the implementation of a harmonised regulatory scheme which aims to eliminate technical barriers to trade. The various FDAs have implemented the ASEAN Common Technical Requirements and Dossier (ACTR/ACTD) on Quality, Safety and Efficacy, which provides guidelines on analytical and process validation, stability studies, and bioavailability/bioequivalence.

Medical devices. Each member state has until 2014 to implement the new requirements established by the Medical Device Working Group, to finalise the harmonisation process for all medical devices.

Food. In 2009, the AEC adopted the ASEAN Integrated Food Security Framework and Strategy Plan of Action for ASEAN Food Security and is currently considering using the Codex General Standards for Food Additives (GSFA) as the basis for harmonisation.

Agricultural products and livestock. Harmonisation of agricultural products is also well underway, with the 2006 ASEAN Good Agricultural Practices for Fresh Fruit and Vegetables (ASEAN GAP) adopted as a standard for the production, harvesting, and post-harvest handling of fruits and vegetables in the region. Other harmonisation standards include accreditation of livestock establishments and livestock products.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Industries

Life Sciences

Practices

Intellectual Property

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 24, 2024
Thailand’s Minister of Public Health recently promulgated the Ministerial Notification Re: Category 5 Narcotics Which Are Not Cannabis or Hemp Extract and Whose Consumption is Permitted for Treatment of Disease or for Research Purposes (2024). The notification took effect on April 23, 2024. The substances whose regulatory controls are affected by this new notification are psilocybin mushroom (Psilocybe cubensis (Earle) Singer), opium poppy (Papaver somniferum L. and Papaver bracteatum Lindl.), and other plants in these genera from which opium, opium alkaloids, psilocybin, or psilocin may be derived. As a result of this notification, these substances are now classified as category 5 narcotics that can be applied in medical treatment. Without the implementation of this notification, patients could not access newly developed medicines containing these substances, as Thailand’s Narcotic Code prohibits the possession and use of category 5 narcotics. Nonetheless, this does not mean that psilocybin mushrooms and opium can be used without any conditions. There is still a long process to go through before these substances can be used in medical treatment or clinical studies. Under the new notification, the FDA must first approve any medicinal drug formulation containing any of the above substances, and subsequently, the production must be approved for medical use or research purposes. The importation of medicinal drug formulations containing psilocybin mushrooms or opium is not allowed. This seemingly small regulatory change addresses the previous legal obstacle to the research and development of such medicines. According to the previous regulation, a physician or researcher could apply to the Thai FDA for a license to produce or possess medicines containing the aforementioned narcotics. However, production and consumption are considered different activities, and consuming a narcotic-containing medicine, even if it was produced under a valid license, is prohibited by the Narcotics Code and is punishable by imprisonment,
Read More
June 11, 2024
Advances in biotechnology have enabled the development of a range of new agricultural tools. From DNA sequencing to plant tissue culture and gene editing, these advances are facilitating the development of better crops. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are one well-known example of agricultural biotechnology. GMOs are organisms whose genetic material has been artificially altered by inserting a piece of foreign DNA. This DNA may be synthetic in origin or sourced from other organisms. Genome editing (also called gene editing or GEd) involves making precise changes to an organism’s genome without the integration of foreign DNA elements. Several approaches to genome editing have been developed. A well-known one is called CRISPR-Cas9, in which scientists make precise “cuts” in the DNA to create a new genetic variation. Unlike with GMOs, this introduces only minor modifications that are indistinguishable from natural mutations, typically by transplanting genes that code desirable traits from one species into another. GEd technology has been recognized and supported by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Thirteen FAO-member countries who are also members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) announced their support of the use of GEd technology for commercial uses and consumption at a recent WTO meeting. In addition, over 40 countries around the world, such as Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, England, Japan, Kenya, the Philippines, Russia, the UK, and the US, have published policies emphasizing that foods free of transgenes (i.e., foods that do not contain genes transferred from external sources) are not GMOs, concluding that GEd plants are as safe as normal plants. In February 2024, the European Parliament approved new genomic techniques (NGTs), or GEd. As a result, plants that are produced using GEd technology are not classified by the EU as GMOs, and the EU
Read More
February 14, 2024
Thailand is preparing to implement new rules on drug importation for clinical studies. The Medicines Regulation Department of Thailand’s Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) first issued the Notification Re. Detailed Requirements for Drug Importation into Thailand for Clinical Studies almost a year ago, and the notification is expected to come into effect on March 1, 2024. Key Provisions The notification aims at enhancing the efficiency of conducting clinical studies while ensuring the protection of human subjects participating in such studies within Thailand. Some of its key provisions include: Definition of Clinical Study. The notification defines a “clinical study” as a study of a medicine involving human subjects, conducted to provide supporting evidence for the registration of a medicinal product in Thailand or other countries, including for additional indications or variations of a registration dossier. Compliance with ICH GCP. Clinical studies conducted in Thailand must adhere to the current edition of the International Council for Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines. Clinical Trial Application. Sponsors are required to submit a clinical trial application along with supporting documents to the Thai FDA for approval before commencing a clinical study. The permit remains valid for five years and is renewable. Supply of Investigational Drugs. Sponsors must obtain investigational drugs from manufacturers compliant with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standards as recognized by the Thai FDA. Postapproval Obligations. The secretary-general of the Thai FDA may impose postapproval conditions or order investigators to conduct or suspend certain activities to ensure human subject protection and regulatory compliance. Regulatory Oversight. The Thai FDA is responsible for inspecting and overseeing the regulatory compliance of clinical studies, including during prestudy, ongoing, and poststudy phases. The Thai FDA may also conduct inspections of clinical studies conducted overseas. The Thai FDA
Read More
December 15, 2023
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has published an updated edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand for 2023. This guide outlines the key factors for starting and operating a business in the Thai market. Issues covered include: Investment incentives Financial facilities Exchange controls Import and export regulations Structures for doing business Requirements for the Establishment of a Business Operation of the Business Cessation or Termination of the Business Labor legislation, relations, and supply Tax Immigration requirements This publication is part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series prepared by member firms in more than 100 jurisdictions worldwide. The guides serve as a useful resource for planning international business strategy and researching new markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand is available through the button below.
Read More