India's Position on the TRIPS Waiver: A Win for the Global South or Diplomatic Compromise?

This article is written by Harinibai R during her internship with Le Droit India.

Abstract

This paper critically examines India’s position on the World Trade Organization (WTO) TRIPS waiver proposal, which sought to temporarily suspend certain intellectual property (IP) protections to enhance global access to COVID-19 vaccines, medicines, and technologies. The research explores whether India’s stance represents a significant victory for the Global South or a diplomatic compromise shaped by international pressures. Through an analysis of negotiation history, stakeholder interests, and the outcomes of the waiver, the paper assesses the implications for global health equity, South-South solidarity, and India’s diplomatic credibility.

Keywords: TRIPS Waiver, Global Health Equity, India’s Foreign Policy, Intellectual Property Rights, South-South Solidarity

Introduction: 

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed deep inequities in global health systems, particularly in access to life-saving vaccines and treatments. In October 2020, India and South Africa jointly proposed a waiver of certain provisions of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) at the WTO, aiming to remove IP barriers that hindered timely and affordable access to COVID-19 medical products. The proposal galvanized support from developing nations and civil society but faced staunch opposition from several developed countries and the pharmaceutical industry.

India’s leadership in this initiative positioned it as a champion of the Global South. However, the eventual outcome—a diluted compromise text—has sparked debate over whether India’s efforts yielded a meaningful victory or resulted in a diplomatic concession. This paper explores the evolution of India’s position, the dynamics of the negotiations, and the broader implications for global health governance.

Background: The TRIPS Agreement and the Waiver Proposal

The TRIPS Agreement

The TRIPS Agreement, adopted in 1995, established minimum standards for IP protection among WTO members, covering patents, copyrights, industrial designs, and undisclosed information. While intended to foster innovation, TRIPS has been criticized for prioritizing IP rights over public health, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

The Waiver Proposal

In October 2020, India and South Africa submitted a proposal to the WTO’s TRIPS Council seeking a temporary waiver of certain TRIPS provisions for the prevention, containment, and treatment of COVID-19. The waiver aimed to:

• Enable countries to bypass IP barriers for COVID-19 vaccines, medicines, and related technologies.
• Facilitate local manufacturing and supply of medical products.
• Address inequities in access, particularly for the Global South.

The proposal garnered support from over 100 WTO members, the United Nations, and numerous civil society organizations, who argued that IP rights were impeding timely and equitable access to COVID-19 countermeasures.

India’s Rationale and Advocacy

Motivations:

India’s advocacy for the TRIPS waiver was driven by several factors:

• Public Health Imperative: The pandemic’s devastating impact in India and other developing countries highlighted the urgent need for affordable vaccines and treatments.
• Manufacturing Capacity: India’s robust pharmaceutical sector positioned it to play a key role in scaling up global vaccine and drug production if IP barriers were lifted.
• Leadership in the Global South: India sought to reaffirm its role as a voice for developing countries in multilateral forums.

Diplomatic Strategy:

India’s approach combined coalition-building with South Africa and other LMICs, public advocacy at the WTO, and engagement with international organizations. The proposal was framed as a humanitarian response to an unprecedented global crisis, emphasizing solidarity and collective action.

Negotiation Dynamics and International Response:

Support and Opposition:

Support: The waiver was backed by the African Group, Least Developed Countries (LDCs), and many Asian and Latin American nations. Civil society organizations and global health advocates also mobilized in support.

Opposition: The European Union, United States (initially), Switzerland, and the United Kingdom opposed the waiver, citing concerns about innovation incentives and the sufficiency of existing TRIPS flexibilities.

The Quad Process and Compromise

After months of deadlock, negotiations shifted to a “Quad” format involving India, South Africa, the United States, and the European Union. This process produced a compromise draft that significantly narrowed the scope of the original proposal, focusing primarily on vaccines and limiting the waiver’s duration and applicability.

The Final Outcome: Ministerial Decision at MC12

At the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC12) in June 2022, a Ministerial Decision was adopted, reflecting the compromise text. Key features included:

• Scope: The waiver applied only to COVID-19 vaccines, excluding therapeutics and diagnostics.
• Duration: The waiver was limited to five years.
• Eligibility: Only developing countries that exported less than 10% of global vaccine exports in 2021 could benefit.
• Compulsory Licensing: The decision clarified procedures for issuing compulsory licenses for vaccine production.

Critical Assessment: Win for the Global South or Diplomatic Compromise?

Achievements:

• Recognition of IP Barriers: The waiver debate brought global attention to the role of IP in restricting access to essential medicines, marking a shift in international discourse.
• Catalyst for South-South Solidarity: India’s leadership galvanized developing countries to assert their interests in global health governance.
• Incremental Gains: The final decision, though limited, provided some legal clarity and flexibility for vaccine production.

Limitations and Critiques:

• Dilution of the Original Proposal: The compromise text fell far short of the comprehensive waiver initially sought by India and South Africa. It excluded therapeutics and diagnostics, which are critical for pandemic response.
• Limited Practical Impact: The restrictive eligibility criteria and focus on vaccines reduced the waiver’s potential to expand manufacturing and access in the Global South.
• Diplomatic Concessions: India’s acceptance of the compromise has been interpreted by some as a retreat under international pressure, raising questions about its negotiating capacity and commitment to South-South solidarity.
• Domestic Policy Incoherence: Critics have noted inconsistencies between India’s international advocacy and its domestic IP policies, such as continued patenting of COVID-19 innovations.

Perspectives from the Global South:

Support for India’s Efforts:

Many developing countries and civil society actors view India’s initiative as a bold and necessary intervention that challenged the status quo of global IP governance. The proposal was seen as a rallying point for the Global South to demand equitable access to health technologies.

Disappointment with the Outcome:

However, there is widespread disappointment with the final outcome. The compromise is seen as insufficient to address the structural inequities in access to medicines and as a missed opportunity to set a transformative precedent for future global health emergencies.

Implications for Global Health Governance:

Precedent for Future Pandemics:

The TRIPS waiver debate has set a precedent for considering IP waivers in future health crises. It has also highlighted the need for reforming global IP rules to prioritize public health over private interests.

India’s Diplomatic Credibility:

India’s role in the negotiations has enhanced its profile as a leader of the Global South but also exposed the challenges of balancing domestic interests, international alliances, and the expectations of developing countries.

Lessons Learned:

• Coalition-Building: Sustained coalition-building among developing countries is essential for effective advocacy in multilateral forums.
• Policy Coherence: Alignment between international advocacy and domestic policy strengthens credibility and negotiating leverage.
• Strategic Pragmatism: Flexibility and pragmatism are necessary in complex negotiations but should not undermine core objectives.

Conclusion:

India’s position on the TRIPS waiver reflects both the possibilities and limitations of Global South leadership in international economic governance. While the initiative marked a significant assertion of developing country interests and shifted global discourse on IP and public health, the eventual outcome was a compromise shaped by geopolitical realities and the entrenched interests of developed countries.

The experience underscores the need for continued advocacy, greater policy coherence, and stronger South-South solidarity to achieve equitable access to health technologies. The TRIPS waiver debate will remain a touchstone for evaluating the effectiveness of global health governance and the prospects for transformative change in the international IP regime.

Reference: 

1. Médecins Sans Frontières, India and South Africa proposal for WTO waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the prevention, containment and treatment of COVID-19 (Nov. 18, 2020), https://msfaccess.org/sites/default/files/2020-11/COVID_Brief_WTO_WaiverProposal_ENG_v2_18Nov2020.pdf.
2. Wikipedia, TRIPS Agreement waiver, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIPS_Agreement_waiver (last visited June 18, 2021).
3. Brajendra Navnit, Science has delivered, will the WTO deliver? TRIPS waiver proposal from India, South Africa and other members, https://cgishanghai.gov.in/pdf/event/TRIPS_Waiver_Op_ed_India.pdf.
4. Prashant Reddy T., [Part I] India’s Hypocrisy over the TRIPs Waiver During the Pandemic, SpicyIP (Apr. 3, 2025), https://spicyip.com/2025/04/part-i-indias-hypocrisy-over-the-trips-waiver-during-the-pandemic.html.
5. Sandeep S. Rathod, In The Name Of TRIPS Waiver, LiveLaw (Mar. 23, 2022), https://www.livelaw.in/columns/trips-waiver-wto-trips-agreement-intellectual-property-ip-194797.
6. Jaume Vidal, Beyond business as usual? TRIPS waiver and the struggle against COVID-19 pandemic, European Public Health Alliance (July 8, 2021), https://epha.org/beyond-business-as-usual-trips-waiver-and-the-struggle-against-covid-19-pandemic/.
7. AfCFTA Policy Network, The TRIPS Waiver Compromise Draft Text: A Preliminary Assessment, Afronomicslaw, https://www.afronomicslaw.org/category/analysis/trips-waiver-compromise-draft-text-preliminary-assessment.
8. Dinesh C. Sharma, India finally gives in on TRIPS waiver, Down To Earth, https://www.downtoearth.org.in/economy/india-finally-gives-in-on-trips-waiver-83402.
9. RIS, TRIPS Waiver: Issues and Challenges, RIS Diary (July 2021), https://www.ris.org.in/sites/default/files/Publication/RIS%20Diary%20July%202021%20English%20new-min.pdf.
10. K. M. Gopakumar, Have India and South Africa, Lead Sponsors of the TRIPS Waiver Proposal, Reconciled to a Weak Text?, The Wire (June 10, 2022), https://thewire.in/trade/have-india-and-south-africa-lead-sponsors-of-the-trips-waiver-proposal-reconciled-to-a-weak-text.
11. The New Indian Express, Decision on TRIPS waiver proposal absolutely crucial in these trying times: India (Aug. 4, 2021), https://www.newindianexpress.com/business/2021/Aug/04/decision-on-trips-waiver-proposal-absolutely-crucial-in-these-trying-times-india-2340124.html.
12. Focus on the Global South, REVOKE WTO TRIPS: NO COMPROMISE ON EQUITABLE ACCESS TO COVID 19 TREATMENT (June 13, 2022), https://focusweb.org/revoke-wto-trips/.
13. Yogesh Pai & Prashant Reddy T., The TRIPs waiver and India: A misadventure and a compromise in Geneva by the government, Scroll.in (June 29, 2022), https://scroll.in/article/1027163/the-trips-waiver-and-india-a-misadventure-and-a-compromise-in-geneva-by-the-government.
14. Rashmi Banga, TRIPS Waiver Negotiations Go Down to the Wire in Geneva, International Institute for Sustainable Development (June 7, 2022), https://www.iisd.org/articles/policy-analysis/trips-waiver-negotiations-mc12.
15. South Centre, Statement: TRIPS Waiver: An Insufficient Multilateral Response. TRIPS-Consistent National Actions Are Called For (June 21, 2022), https://www.southcentre.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/SC-Statement-TRIPS-waiver-FINAL-1.pdf.
16. Rajeswari Pillai Rajagopalan, Compromised TRIPS waiver: One step forward, two steps back, Observer Research Foundation, https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/compromised-trips-waiver.
17. AIPPI, Inside the COVID-19 TRIPS Waiver, https://www.aippi.org/news/inside-the-covid-19-trips-waiver-ongoing-discussions-on-possible-extension-to-diagnostics-and-therapeutics/.
18. Jaume Vidal, After the storm: Lessons, teachings and possibilities of the TRIPS waivers proposal, European Public Health Alliance, https://epha.org/after-the-storm-lessons-teachings-and-possibilities-of-the-trips-waivers-proposal/.
19. WTO, Members to continue discussion on proposal for temporary IP waiver, https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news20_e/trip_10dec20_e.htm.
20. WTO, Waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the prevention, containment and treatment of COVID-19, IP/C/W/669, https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q%3A%2FIP%2FC%2FW669.pdf&Open=True.