Tanzania has been changing positions on admitting sugar exports from Uganda since last year. PHOTO BY TAUSI NAKATO
In Summary
Backtracking. This is the third time Tanzania is backtracking on banning sugar exports, especially from Uganda in less than four months.
Advertisement
By John Namkwahe
Tanzania has again backtracked on its decision to ban sugar imports, a week after freezing issuance of permits.
Mr Japhet Hasunga, the Tanzania minister of Agriculture, told journalists last week that government was now contented with plans by manufacturers to produce more sugar.
“We are now satisfied with the companies’ strategic plans to increase sugar production. That is why we have decided to allow them to supply and import sugar for domestic consumption,” he said.
About a week ago, Mr Hasunga had accused manufacturers of importing “sugar very fast, overlooking their role of producing”.
The freeze, he said, was intended to force manufacturers to concentrate on production, claiming that the country had enough stocks to sustain demand until May.
Tanzania produces about 320,000 tonnes of sugar against a national annual demand of 670,000 tonnes.
Mr Hasunga said government would issue permits to non-sugar producing companies from June to bridge the gap, expressing optimism that sugar output would increase once Mkulazi Sugar, owned by two pension schemes in Tanzania and Bakhresa Group’s Bagamoyo factory with capacity to produce 250,000 tonnes and 100,000 tonnes, respectively are complete.
Last year, Tanzania banned Ugandan sugar traders from its market, claiming that they were importing cheap sugar from Kenya and Brazil, before it is repackaged and exported to Tanzania.
The Tanzania government, in the process, slapped a 25 per cent Excise Duty on Sugar that had been exported by Kakira Sugar Works, which was later returned to Uganda.
Negotiations to lift the 25 per cent duty on Ugandan sugar has been ongoing amid mixed policy directives.
In December last year, Trade Minister Amelia Kyambadde, said they had not been furnished with clear reasons why Tanzania, had withdrawn sugar import permits it had started issuing in December 2018.
However, the ban was later suspended in January, before it was reinstated and then lifted just in the last two weeks.
MANPOWER
In December, Tanzania had lifted the ban on sugar imports and other agricultural produces from Uganda. But the country’s government about a week ago stunned traders with a new ban that has since been lifted, though temporarily, according to some experts.
Counterfeit law will hinder manufacture, access of drugs
aption: SEATINI-Uganda Country Director, Ms Jane Nalunga (left) engages the representative of Uganda Joint Christian Council, Ms Betty Adio. In the background is the executive director, HEPS-Uganda and Mr David Kabanda, a health lawyer. Courtesy photo
Calls to review some of the most defining clauses contained in the proposed counterfeit law has gathered some momentum, with the section of analysts and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), cautioning the executive arm of government against re-tabling the bill on the floor of parliament in its current form.
The proposed law, titled, the Anti-Counterfeiting Goods Bill, 2015 seeks to prohibit the manufacture and trade in counterfeit goods that infringe upon protected intellectual property rights, something analysts and a range of CSOs describe as “suicidal provision” for the country.
The bill also intends to prohibit release of counterfeit goods in channels of commerce and create offences relating to trade in counterfeit goods.
Speaking yesterday at the stakeholders consultative meeting held in Kampala on “The changes in the Health landscape and implications to the Right to Health in Uganda” Amb. Nathan Irumba, a seasoned trade and investment negotiator and a veteran trade analysts, said: “Agreements related to the protected intellectual property rights are more restrictive.”
He continued: “So the drafters of the proposed law are shooting themselves in the foot because that provision essentially means that Uganda will have no access or even rights to manufacture generic drugs yet it is the most affordable and widely prescribed kind of medicines across the country.”
Generic drugs are copies of brand-name drugs that have exactly the same dosage, intended use, effects, side effects, route of administration, risks, safety, and strength as the original drug. In other words, their effects are exactly the same as those of their brand-name counterparts.
Analysts dissects
Weighing in on the matter, Prof. Mwambutsya Ndebesa, a renowned scholar and political, social and economic analyst, said the proposed law currently being reexamined by Cabinet, violates the right to access to drugs/medicine as well as the right to health.
This is because if the bill finds its way to the floor of parliament and somehow get passed in its current form, it will effectively render pharmaceutical industry in the country useless. In addition it will be illegal to manufacture generic drugs here. And those caught doing so (manufacturing drugs) will be held criminally liable.
In the presentation of the Program Officer, SEATINI-Uganda, Mr Kiiza Africa, it became evident that the definition of counterfeit as contained in the proposed bill is not only problematic but also exposes the country to unnecessary restriction to access of the much-subsidized drugs.
Should the bill make a comeback in parliament and given a nod of approval, it will make it impossible for the majority of the population to access drugs at affordable prices. But to cure this problem, Mr Kiiza seems to suggest that thorough diagnosis of Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) be conducted.
TRIPS is an international legal agreement between all the member nations of the World Trade Organization (WTO). It sets down minimum standards for the regulation by national governments of many forms of intellectual property (IP) as applied to nationals of other WTO member nations.
TRIPS was negotiated at the end of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) between 1989 and 1990 and is administered by the WTO
The Executive Director, HEPS, Mr Kibira Dennis, in his submission said the proposed law will render generic drugs as counterfeit, urging the drafters of the bill to adopt the World Health Organisation definition which clearly distinguishes between counterfeit and falsification of drugs.
However, Dr. David Okello, the Director Non-Communicable Diseases and Health Ageing, wondered how the influx of substandard and fake drugs can be curtailed in the absence of such a law. It emerged that there are already laws in place to deal with such violation although not being properly enforced.
As a way forward, Amb Irumba advised that Uganda and the Least Developed Countries should continue to take advantage the TRIPS agreement which allows them access to manufacture generic drugs.
—————–
In spite of some strides made in policies and frameworks, the health sector is still confronted with a number of challenges and dynamics which have subsequently made access to health in Uganda a challenge.
These dynamics vary from the New Aid Architecture; Public Private Partnership (PPPs) in Health Sector; Mobility of Health Workers and trade related policies like TRIPS. The purpose of the meeting organized by SEATINI-Uganda was therefore important for the stakeholders including Policy Makers, Human Rights and Health Rights activists to engage with a view of forging a solution forward
