The Supreme Court on Tuesday said procedures under
the uniform code for pharmaceutical marketing should be so strong that any
consumer who is cheated should have access and proper remedy against unethical
practices.
A bench of justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta
observed there should be appropriate measures where the consumers have a
convenient mechanism for lodging their complaints and ensuring that action is
taken against erring companies.
The top court was hearing a plea seeking that the
uniform code of pharmaceutical marketing practices should curb alleged
unethical practices of pharma firms.
Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj, appearing
for the Centre, said the government has introduced several policies for the
purpose of either restricting the pricing of medicines and to regulate such
activities.
He referred to the Uniform Code for Pharmaceuticals
Marketing Practices (UCPMP), 2024, which prohibits pharma companies from
offering gifts and travel facilities to healthcare professionals or their family
members.
"But if you have brought out a code, why should
not that code be having appropriate measures whereby the consumers have a
convenient mechanism for lodging their complaints and ensuring that action is
taken against erring companies," the bench asked.
Nataraj, who referred to the process of lodging
complaints and penalties under the UCPMP, said an independent portal to that
effect could be brought out.
He also referred to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act,
1940, which regulates the import, manufacture, distribution and sale of drugs.
The bench observed the procedure under the UCPMP
should be "so strong that every person or the consumer who is cheated
should be having access and proper remedy".
On the aspect of pricing, Nataraj said a separate
mechanism and regulation was there.
Senior advocate Sanjay Parikh, appearing for the
petitioners, said the UCPMP 2024 is only a voluntary code.
The bench told Nataraj to take instructions on
whether there was any move on the part of the government to bring out a statutory
regime for taking care of these activities.
It also asked Parikh to give suggestions on the
issues raised in the plea.
The bench said the law officer may obtain
instructions on the suggestions and posted the matter for hearing on December
16.
While hearing the matter in September, the top court
said the actual "difficulty" was in implementation of the existing
norms.
In March 2022, the apex court agreed to hear the
plea and issued notice to the Centre seeking its response on the issue.
The plea filed by 'Federation of Medical and Sales
Representatives Association of India' and others sought a direction that till
an effective law was enacted as prayed, the top court may lay down the
guidelines to control and regulate unethical marketing practices by pharmaceutical
companies or in the alternative, make the existing Code binding with proper and
reasonable modifications/additions.
The plea said the Indian Medical Council
(Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations of 2002 prescribe a
code of conduct for doctors in their relationship with pharmaceutical and
allied health sector industry, and prohibit acceptance of gifts and
entertainment, travel facilities, hospitality or monetary grants from
pharmaceutical companies.
"This code is enforceable against doctors,
however, does not apply to drug companies, leading to anomalous situations
where doctors' licences are cancelled for misconduct which is actuated,
encouraged, aided, and abetted by pharma companies. The pharma companies go
scot-free," it claimed.
The plea alleged that though termed as "sales
promotion", in fact, direct or indirect advantages were offered to doctors
(as gifts and entertainment, sponsored foreign trips, hospitality, and other
benefits) in exchange for an increase in drug sales.
It claimed no enforceable law exists which regulates
the promotion of drugs by pharmaceutical companies vis-a-vis healthcare
professionals, and therefore, unethical practices continue unfettered.