US embassy cable - 03ANKARA1368

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 001368 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
TREASURY FOR OASIA 
STATE FOR EB/TPP/MTA/IPC - WILSON AND EUR/SE 
DEPT PASS USTR FOR DBIRDSEY/KALVAREZ, PATENT AND 
TRADEMARK OFFICE FOR URBAN, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS FOR TEPP 
USDOC FOR ITA/MAC/DDEFALCO 
 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETRD, KIPR, TU, USTR, WTO 
SUBJECT:  GOT's Preliminary Views for the Special 301 
Review of Intellectual Property Protection 
 
 
(SBU) On February 28, Oya Karakas, Head of Department in 
the MFA General Directorate of Multilateral Economic 
Affairs, sent Embassy the following note on intellectual 
property protection in Turkey in response to the 
commencement of this year's Special 301 review.  MFA 
acknowledges reports submitted by IIPA, IACC and PhRMA, 
but states that it will submit substantive comments once 
it has had the opportunity to review them in greater 
detail.  The MFA note acknowledges IPR enforcement 
problems.  Alluding to PhRMA's submission, MFA maintains 
that there is a need for flexible implementation of 
trade commitments affecting public health. 
 
 
Begin Text MFA Reply: 
 
 
No. CEGY-I 25.02.2003 
 
 
PRELIMINARY VIEWS ON "THE SPECIAL 301 REVIEW" 
 
 
Since we consider protection of intellectual property as 
an important tool to encourage and promote human 
creativity and productivity, we aim at meeting 
international standards and fulfilling international 
agreements in the area of intellectual property 
protection. We also make our contribution to 
international cooperation initiatives. 
 
 
In this context, we do our best, within the limits of 
our existing capabilities and resources, in order to 
adopt relevant international agreements and create an 
environment to promote foreign investments where a 
certain level of intellectual property protection is 
ensured. However, it is not unusual to face some 
difficulties about implementation and enforcement of new 
legislation. Moreover, if some commercial interests are 
concerned and if some people face unemployment and short- 
term losses of income in a developing economy, these 
difficulties are further complicated. 
 
 
So far, we have welcomed criticism brought forward by 
our trade partners in the framework of our international 
commitments, such as those voiced at the World Trade 
Organization TRIPS Council during the review of our 
legislation. In this connection, we attach utmost 
importance to comments of the United States Government 
and its "Special 301 Review". 
 
 
In the context of, "Special 301 Review" we have had a 
satisfactory level of cooperation with the US Government 
up to now and we expect this to continue. We are also 
pleased with the interest of the US companies and the 
concerned specialized associations in the implementation 
and enforcement of intellectual property protection in 
Turkey. 
 
 
After a preliminary study of the points raised by these 
associations, namely IIPA, IACC and PhRMA, and their 
comments mentioned in their submissions, we would like 
to assure you that they will receive Turkish 
Government's due consideration and our relevant 
authorities will study them in detail with respect to 
their technical aspects. We hope to submit our 
substantial comments later after this study. 
Nevertheless, we wish to present some preliminary 
observations at this stage. 
 
 
Regarding the comments of IIPA and IACC, we are also 
aware of certain problems of implementation and 
enforcement. Despite our known efforts to improve the 
capacity and expertise of law enforcement authorities in 
this field, still there are certain shortcomings. We 
should also take into account the economic situation in 
the aftermath of a severe financial crisis. Since, 
immediate implications of enforcement of intellectual 
property protection are unemployment and loss of income 
for some segments of society, in some cases this issue 
becomes very sensitive. As we all know, accommodation of 
intellectual property protection and development issues 
is a widespread matter of debate in various 
international fora. We should also bear in mind that 
some copyright violations concern educational materials 
and this requires a special attention. Nevertheless, we 
appreciate the relatively balanced approach of these two 
associations and again we assure that these comments 
will receive our due consideration and appropriate 
measures will be taken accordingly. 
 
 
As for the comments of PhRMA, needless to say health 
issues have a special dimension in the context of 
international trade regulations. Public health is such 
an issue that it cannot be regulated only by trade 
concerns. Special considerations of governments in 
health and social policies should be given due respect. 
As we know, one of the most heated debates of the WTO 
Doha Development Agenda Negotiations is on this very 
issue and there is a growing global concern on the 
relationship between public health and intellectual 
property protection. 
 
 
Compared with other social policy issues, health 
policies have a particular significance, since in some 
cases it is a question of life and death. It is not a 
surprise that health issues have a priority among others 
for governments. That is especially the case for 
developing countries with populations more vulnerable. 
Therefore, in the context of international trade, they 
require flexibility more than other trade issues. 
 
 
The comments of PhRMA will also receive our due 
consideration and of course appropriate measures within 
the limits of possibilities will be taken accordingly. 
 
 
We expect that the US Government will take into 
consideration our good will on this issue prior to the 
finalisation of the "Special 301 Review". 
 
 
End Text. 
Pearson