Unethical practices of pharma firms: People should have proper remedy, says SC

New Delhi, Nov 18 (PTI) 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. PTI ABA ZMN