수신: 각 언론사 사회부, 법무부, 산업부, 국제부, 복지부 및 보건의료 담당

발신: 건강사회를위한약사회 (담당 : 이동근 사무국장 010-9697-0525, donodo@naver.com), 참여연대 사회복지위원회 (담당: 이경민 팀장 02-723-5056, welfare@pspd.org), 정보공유연대 (담당: 김조은 운영위원 010-4109-4380)

제목: [보도자료] 코로나19 백신 특허권 유예 촉구 기자회견

날짜: 2021. 04. 28 (총3쪽)

백신은 인류 공공재!
특허권을 풀어 생명을 구하라!

일시 장소: 2021. 04.29.(목) 10:00, 국회 정문 앞

1.  취지

• 코로나19 팬데믹이 1년 넘게 지속되고 있습니다. 각 나라의 공적 자금을 지원받아 코로나19 백신이 개발되었지만, 세계 백신 불평등 문제로 감염병 위기는 언제 끝날지 알 수 없는 상황입니다. 인도에서는 하루 35만 명이 감염되는 초유의 사태에 이르렀고 사람들은 병원 문 앞에서 치료제와 산소공급을 받지 못해 죽어가고 있는 비참한 상황에 이르고 있습니다.
• 이번 백신은 팬데믹이라는 초유의 사태 속에서 국제기구와 각국 정부의 막대한 재정적, 제도적 지원이 있었기 때문에 겨우 개발될 수 있었습니다. 하지만 거대 제약기업들과 미국과 유럽 등 부유국 정부는 신자유주의 체제를 만들어 낸 지적재산권과 특허제도라는 배타적 독점권을 이용해 상상을 초월하는 수익을 얻고 있는 대신 가난한 나라들은 하루 수 십만 명이 감염되고 사망하는 일이 동시에 벌어지고 있습니다. 팬데믹으로 세계는 더욱 불평등해지고 있지만, 초기에 공평한 백신 사용을 약속했던 부유한 국가들은 자국 우선주의 행태를 보이며 백신 공급을 독점하고 있습니다. 이 때문에 우리와 가장 근접한 북한을 포함한 다수의 가난한 나라에서는 지금  단 한 명의 사람도 백신을  접종 받지 못하고 있으며, 부유한 국가를 제외한 대부분의 나라에서는 2022년이 되어서야 일정량의 백신 접종이 가능할 것으로 예측되고 있습니다. 백신으로 인해 더욱 심각해진 건강 불평등은 경제 불평등에도 장기적 영향을 미쳐  부유국과 가난한 나라 간 심각한 경제 양극화를 초래할 것으로 보입니다.
• 이러한 불평등과 불합리를 팬데믹 상황에서라도 일시적으로 멈추게 하기 위해 중저소득국가들은 ‘무역 관련 지적재산권 협정(TRIPS)’의 특허 등 특정 조항을 일시적으로 유예하자는 제안(이하 ‘트립스 유예안’)을 제출하여 시급하고 긴급한 논의를 진행하고 있습니다. 이는 코로나19 대응에 필요한 백신과 같은 의료기술에 적용되는 독점권을 일시 유예함으로써 세계 모든 사람들이 백신을 신속하고 공평하게 접근 가능하도록 하자는 취지에서 제안된 것입니다. 일시적이라도 트립스 유예안이 발효된다면 세계 백신 생산이 가능한 시설을 총동원하여 전체 백신 생산량을 늘리고, 인류애를 통한 신속하고 공평한 백신 배분의 가능성이 열리게 됩니다.
• 지난 4월 5일 장혜영 의원 등 14명의 국회의원이 트립스 유예안에 대한민국 국회와 정부도 지지하여 국제사회의 요구에 동참할 것을 촉구하는 결의안을 발의하였습니다. 이미 트립스 유예안은 WTO 회원국 ⅔ 이상과 국제기구, 전 세계 수백 개의 풀뿌리  시민사회단체가 지지하고 있습니다. 그리고 100명의 영국의회 의원, 342명의 유럽의회 의원과 유럽연합 회원국 의회의원이 지지하였습니다. 미국에서도 버니샌더스 상원의원 등 60여명 민주당 의원들이 바이든 행정부에 트립스 유예안 지지를 촉구하고 있습니다. 문재인 대통령과 한국정부는 여러 국제회의에서 백신의 공평한 접근을 지지한다고 발언했지만 트립스 협정 유예에 대해서는 침묵으로 일관하고 있습니다. 이에 한국의 시민사회단체는 5월 5일과 6일 양일간 열리는  WTO 일반이사회를 앞두고, 국회가 이 결의안을 반드시 통과시키고 한국정부가 전 지구적 연대와 협력의 자세로 트립스 유예안을 지지할 것을 촉구하기 위해 기자회견을 개최합니다 .

※  트립스 유예안에 대한 자세한 내용은 [참고1]을 참고하시기 바랍니다.

2.  기자회견 개요

• 제목 : 코로나19 백신의 공평한 접근만이 모두의 건강을 보호할 수 있다
• 일시 및 장소 : 2021. 04. 29.(목) 10:00 / 국회정문 앞
• 주최 : 건강권실현을 위한 보건의료단체연합, 건강사회를위한약사회, 건강세상네트워크, 공공운수노조, 사회진보연대, 시민건강연구소, 약사의미래를준비하는모임, 연구공동체 건강과대안, 의료민영화저지와 무상의료실현을 위한 운동본부, 정보공유연대 IPLEFT, 지식연구소 공방, 진보네트워크센터, 진보3.0, 참여연대, 투명사회를 위한 정보공개센터, 한국민중건강운동
• 기자회견 순서
  • 사 회 :  변혜진 (건강과대안 상임연구위원)
  • 발언1 : 장혜영 (정의당 국회의원)
  • 발언2 : 김선 (시민건강연구소 건강정책연구센터장/ 민중건강운동 동남아시아태평양 코디네이터)
  • 발언3 : 박정은 (참여연대 사무처장)
  • 발언4 : 이동근 (건강사회를위한약사회 사무국장)
  • 발언5: 김흥수 (전국공공운수노조 사회공공성위원장)
  • 발언6: 김조은 (정보공유연대 운영위원)
  • 기자회견문 낭독 : 전진한(인도주의실천의사협의회 정책국장), 박민숙(전국보건의료산업노동조합 부위원장)

3.  귀 언론사의 취재와 보도를 요청합니다. 끝

▣ 참고1 : [민중건강운동 브리프 2021-02] 트립스 유예안, 제약자본의 지적재산권 독점을 막기 위한 전 세계적 연대를 촉구하다

건강권실현을위한보건의료단체연합, 건강사회를위한약사회, 건강세상네트워크, 공공운수노조, 사회진보연대, 시민건강연구소, 약사의미래를준비하는모임, 연구공동체 건강과대안,  의료민영화저지와무상의료실현을위한운동본부, 정보공유연대 IPleft, 정의당 장혜영 국회의원, 지식연구소 공방, 진보네트워크센터, 진보3.0, 참여연대, 투명사회를위한정보공개센터, 한국민중건강운동

우리나라는 의약품 거래 투명화를 위해 2010년 리베이트 쌍벌제(금전 제공자와 수수자 모두 형사 처벌 가능)와 2014년 리베이트 투아웃제(리베이트 금액에 따라 해당 품목의 건강보험 급여를 단계적으로 중단)를 도입했다. 그러나 실제 현실에서는 정부의 강력한 의지를 확인하기 어렵다. 식품의약품안전처는 최근 노바티스 불법 리베이트 대상인 총 42 품목 중 9개 품목에 대해 3개월 판매업무 정지처분을 내렸으며 나머지 33개 품목에 대해서는 고작 2억 원의 과징금을 부과하는 솜방망이 처분을 내렸을 뿐이다. 제약회사의 불법 리베이트는 의약품 가격을 높이고 건강보험 재정의 악화를 초래하기에 이를 규제해야 할 책임은 보건복지부에 있음에도 불구하고, 되려 보건복지부는 제약회사 눈치만 보며 노바티스에 리베이트 투아웃제를 적용하는 것을 미적거리고 있다.

가장 논란이 되고 있는 노바티스의 글리벡은 이미 2013년에 특허가 만료되어 약 30개의 제네릭 제품이 출시되어 있는 상태다. 특히 노바티스가 더 많은 수입을 올리기 위해 일부러 출시하지 않았던 400mg 용량의 제네릭도 출시되어 있어 오히려 제네릭이 환자들의 복용편의성을 높이고 부작용을 크게 줄일 수 있는 상황이다. 어처구니없게도 노바티스는 자사 홈페이지에는 ‘철 중독 부작용’을 언급하며 400mg 이상 복용 시 100mg 정제가 아닌 400mg 정제를 복용하도록 권하고 있으면서도 국내에서 더 높은 약가 고수를 이유로 공급을 거부하고 있는 형국이다. 이 때문에 환자들은 100mg 정제를 4정에서 최대 8정까지 복용하고 있다. 따라서 글리벡에 대한 보험급여 중단으로 오히려 환자들은 동일한 성분의 약을 더 안전하게 복용할 수 있게 되는 셈이다. 즉, 노바티스 불법 행위에 대한 올바른 처벌은 환자들의 건강권을 위해 더욱 필요하다.

지금 우리는 원칙을 벗어난 특혜와 예외, 그리고 불법 거래들이 한국 사회를 도탄에 빠뜨린 상황을 목도하고 있다. 민주주의와 원칙을 바로 세우려는 국민들은 전직 대통령에게도 평등한 법 집행을 요구하고 있다. 노바티스의 글리벡도 제왕의 지위를 누려왔다는 이유로 더 이상 특혜 대상이 되어서는 안 된다. 국민 건강을 최우선으로 해야 하는 보건복지부는 법에 명시돼 있는 원칙대로 노바티스사의 리베이트에 대한 적법한 조치, 즉 글리벡을 포함한 리베이트 약제에 대한 급여 정지 결정을 조속히 내려야 한다.

2017년 4월 11일

건강과대안 건강권실현을위한 보건의료단체연합(건강사회를위한약사회, 건강사회를위한치과의사회, 노동건강연대, 인도주의실천의사협의회, 참의료실현청년한의사회) / 건강사회를위한약사회 / 건강세상네트워크 / 정보공유연대

라본테 교수는 ‘세계화와 건강 불평등’ 연구의 세계적 권위자로, 세계보건기구 (WHO) 건강의 사회적 결정요인 위원회 (Commission on Social Determinants of Health) 세계화 지식 네트워크 (Globalization Knowledge Network) Chair를 역임했습니다.

대안적 세계보건보고서 <지구촌 건강감시보고서 (Global Health Watch)>의 공저자이며, <Globalization and Health: Pathways, Evidence and Policy>, <Towards Health-Equitable Globalisation: Rights, Regulation and Redistribution> 등 ‘세계화와 건강 불평등’에 관한 핵심 문헌들을 저술한 바 있습니다.

이번 라본테 교수의 특강을 통해 세계화, 자유무역협정과 지적재산권이 공공건강에 미치는 영향에 관한 이해를 넓히고, 더 많은 사회적, 학술적 논의가 이루어지기를 기대합니다.

건강사회를 위한 약사회, 정보공유연대 IPLeft, 중앙대학교 간호과학연구소가 공동주최합니다.

일시: 2016년 11월 24일 (목) 저녁 7시-9시 30분
장소: 중앙대 간호대학 103관 (간호대학) 205호

별도의 통역은 없으나, 발표자료는 국문번역으로 제공됩니다.

1. The protracted Novartis’ appeal from 2006 for a patent to Gleevec (Leukemia medicine), and against Indian Patent law has finally reached a conclusion. On Apr1, Indian Supreme court dismissed Novartis’ appeal. The Supreme Court of India has given the reason for rejecting Novartis’ argument by holding that the physio-chemical properties of the beta crystalline form of imatinib mesylate i.e. flow properties, decreased hygroscopicity and thermodynamic stability may be beneficial for patients in some manner but they do not meet the standard of efficacy required by Section 3(d). In a word, Gleevecis not qualified for a patent because the active ingredient of Gleevec (beta crystalline form of imatinib mesylate) is no better than imatinib(free base) and imatinib mesylate in terms of effectiveness.

2. The ruling of the Supreme Court is not simply confined to whether to give a patent to Novartis, and has emblematic features of deciding what kind of invention is eligible for a patent in India. In 2005 when the Indian patent law was under revision, many activists and patients inserted various safeguards into the law for protecting public health and health right through joint actions with their solidarity. The very examples of the safeguards are compulsory licensing, pre, post-grant opposition, and section 3(d). The section 3(d) states that unless newly invented medicine, compared with the ones invented before 1995, does prove significantly enhanced efficacy, even if the invention is composed of a new form and/or a new composition, and has a new use, that is not patentable. That is all about obstructing ‘ever-greening’. The patent for PEGASYS, medicine for Hepatitis C and B, became invalid in Nov 2011 by the reason of that does not meet the conditions of section 3(d) of Indian Patent law. A patent application for IRESSA, lung cancer medicine, was dismissed for the same reason. HIV/AIDS movement groups are also taking full advantage of section 3(d) in order to block issuing a patent to HIV/AIDS medicine. The ruling of the Supreme Court of India will have an impact on those medicines.

3. The reason why the world pays attention to the Novartis patent case is that this legal battle is not merely restricted to the struggle in between Novartis and Indian cancer patients but the struggle to protect ‘Pharmacy of the World’, and the fight of world patients and activists against the patent-exclusivity of a transnational pharmaceutical company. Not only Novartis’ appeal but Bayer’ appeal against the decision of Indian Patent Office approved the first-ever compulsory licensing on medicine and India-EU FTA has oppressed India, and now India are facing more pressures from the outside world powers like transnational pharmaceutical companies, the USA, EU and etc. Novartis case is a symbolized case riddled with many issues reflecting the conflicts in between the patent right of a Transnational pharmaceutical company and the health right of a patient. Accordingly, patients of the developing world, who need Indian generic medicines, public health NGOs, HIV/AIDS human rights groups, and other groups related to intellectual property has organized international campaigns and engaged in protesting against Novartis. The ruling of the Supreme Court of India is a triumphant victory of all patients and activists’ struggle and solidarity.

4. The Supreme Court’s ruling would have an effect on other neighboring countries to take Indian patent law as a model.WHO/UNDP/UNAIDS mentioned the compulsory licensing of Thailand and the section 3(d) of Indian patent law as success stories in ‘Using TRIPS flexibilities to improve access to HIV treatment (2011)’. Several countries are modeling after the Indian patent law. In May 2005, Argentina announced a new patent-guideline inclusive of strict patentability standards similar to the section 3(d) of Indian patent law. South Africa Treatment Action Campaign and MSF are organising ‘Fix the Patent Laws’ campaign by modeling after the Indian patent law.

5. The Supreme Court of India has addressed how harmful indiscreetly issuing a patent is to people. However, we should not stay on this stage and should move forward further. Once product patent is instituted, Indian people cannot block all patents. The utilization of compulsory licensing is a critical way to secure public health as universal right and sustain ‘Pharmacy of the World’. Moreover, India-EU FTA that is more likely to damage ‘access to affordable medicines’ by ISD, border measure, and IP enforcement should be withdrawn. Indian government has announced to provide free medicine to all patients visiting National medical facilities from Oct 2012. 22% of Indian population benefits from healthcare services by the public sector. The Indian government should increase essential drugs list more and expand the population receiving free-supply. In order to bear the financial burden, purchasing generic drugs is inevitable. On Mar 12 2012, first-ever compulsory licensing of India was permitted, and Indian pharmaceutical company BDR filed compulsory licensing application for Sprycel (Dasatinib), leukemia medicine in 2013. Media has announced that Indian government has been under consideration to compulsory licensing for 3 anti-cancer medicines. Indian government should be expanding compulsory licensing rather than counting on pharmaceutical pricing negotiation.

6. We, Korean activists all welcome the ruling of the Supreme Court of India and very happy to hear it as have been engaged in the struggle for access to medicine. But, on the other hand, this victory does sound regretful to us that is not able to model after the Indian patent law. Many poisonous clauses beneficial to pharmaceutical companies, like ISD and patent-approval linkage have been adopted in S. Korea because of KORUS FTA.Furthermore, Korean government does not take any steps to obstruct unjust actions of the patentees to block the release of generic drugs.Fair Trade Commission of S. Korea has surveyed about the present condition of intellectual contract/dispute (document investigation on the condition of dispute-contract and patent application for main prescription drugs that was applied for approval to Korea Food and Drug Administration, or came into the market from 2000 till 2009). The result of the investigation on 429 contracts obtained showed that ‘trade-in ban for competitive product’ clause and ‘Sales-target limit’ clause by patentee pharmaceutical companies, oppressing generic pharmaceutical companies occupied nearly 55%. However, the Korean government did not take any actions against the revealed situation no other than simply released ‘Guidelines for fair trade of pharmaceutical sector’.

April 2, 2013

Korea Leukemia Patient Group

The Daegu-Gyeongbuk HIV People Self Sopporting Community HAEMAIL

Health Right Network

Korean Progressive Network Jinbonet

Intellectual Property Left

People’s Solidarity for Social Progress

SARANGBANG Group for Human Rights

Korea Alliance Defeat AIDS

Solidarity for HIV/AIDS Human Rights Nanuri+ [ Korean Pharmacists for Democratic Society/ CHINGUSAI-Korean Gay Men’s Human Rights Group/ Public Pharmaceutical Center/ Solidarity for LGBT Human Rights of Korea(DongInRyun)]

Korean Federation of Medical Groups for Health Rights [ Association of Korea Doctors for Health Rights/ Association of Physicians for Humanism/ Korea Dentists Association for Health Society/ Korea Health and Medical Workers Union/ Korean Pharmacists for Democratic Society]

Rainbow Action Against Sexual-Minority Discrimination [ CHINGUSAI – Korean Gay Men’s Human Rights Group/ Collective for Sexual Minority Cultures PINKS/ GongGam Human Rights Law Foundation/ Korean Sexual-Minority Culture and Riughts Center(KSCRC)/ LGBTAIQ Crossing the damn world <Wanbyun> (It means Totally Queer)/ LGBT Human Rights Committee in HanYang University/ Lesbian Counseling Center in South Korea/ Lesbian Human Rights Group ‘Byunnal’ of Ewha Womans University/ Sexual-Minority Committee in The Unified Progressive Party/ Solidarity for HIV/AIDS Human Rights Nanuri+/ Solidarity for LGBT Human Rights of Korea (DongInRyun)/ the Korean lesbian community radio group, Lezpa/ Unninetwork ]

2013-04-01

2013-04-01

<Statement>

Stop the India-EU FTA Negotiations, Decimator of the ‘Pharmacy of the World’!

Dismiss the Novartis’ case!

Abolish the KORUS FTA right now!

US and EU are threatening lives of people living with disease now. The India-EU FTA is an agreement which risk patients’ health none the more than the KORUS FTA. Especially, the India-EU FTA endangers lives of people living with disease all over the world. We urge the Lee Myoung-bak government to abolish KORUS FTA immediately as well as the India government to stop the India-EU FTA negotiation. We also call for the India Supreme Court to dismiss Swiss pharmaceutical company, Novartis’ case toward India’s progressive patent law.

India is called ‘Pharmacy of the World’, because India supplies inexpensive generics for many patients of low and middle-income countries. India provides world’s half of AIDS medicines, especially 90 percent of AIDS medicines supplied to more than 120 developing countries is Indian generics. Moreover, India manufactures 20% of generic medicines in the world including antibiotics, anti cancer medicines, antihypertensive drugs and antidiabetics. There are Two significant cases pending in India which could destroy the future of ‘Phamacy of the World’. Those are negotiation of India-EU FTA and Novartis’ case toward India patent law.

The last hearing of Novartis vs Union of India case in Supreme Court regarding interpretation on Section- 3(d) will be held on 29 November 2011. India patent law prohibits ‘evergreening’ – the practice of multinational pharmaceutical companies to extend their patent terms by making small, trivial changes to existing medicines and thereby preventing access to affordable generics and maintaining their medicine price high(Section- 3(d)). It is progressive law under which patent is granted only when the pharmaceutical company demonstrates significant increase in efficacy rather than when the medicine is more efficacious than flour. Due to this clause, it’s been possible to save lives of people living with disease all over the world by producing generics under the cost less than 1/10 of transnational pharmaceutical company’s ‘fake patent drugs’.

In 2006, the Chennai Patent office, in a landmark decision, refused to grant Novartis’ patent on Glivec which is a medicine for leukemia and stomach cancer(GIST). The decision was on the grounds that Glivec was merely transformation for pre-existing imatinib. On this behalf, Novartis raised a series of lawsuits contending that ‘section 3(d)’ violated the equality provision (Article 14) of the Indian Constitution as well as the TRIPS Agreement. There only remains supreme court’s ruling. If India Supreme Court decide in Novartis’ favour, it will be possible to grant patent on "fake patent medicine" so that inexpensive generics cannot be produced as now. It is not only the matter of Glivec but those of people living with disease around the world.

Added to this, India patent law has to be totally changed due to the India-EU FTA. The India-EU FTA negotiation agenda which has been discussed since 2007, includes medicine data exclusivity, IP enforcement measure and etc. Although the India-EU FTA was to be concluded earlier this year, it has been delayed because of the world wide protests by international NGOs and people living with disease. EU still force India government to finalize negotiation as it was, though EU once stated that data exclusivity and IP enforcement measures could be excluded from the agenda, before the India-EU summit scheduled in the February 2012. Next round of negotiations on IP chapter is scheduled for 5-9 December 2011 in New Delhi.

Once Data Exclusivity is granted, it is impossible to produce generic pharmaceutical products whether they have no patent or patents expired as well as ensure the public use of patent right, like compulsory licensing. In August 2011, Natco Pharma, Indian pharmaceutical company, claimed compulsory licensing based on public purposes for anticancer drug, Nexavar to Bayer that has patent right to it. The compulsory licensing is recorded the first one to produce and use affordable generic medicines in India. For the newest AIDS medicines, the demand for compulsory licensing is in course of preparation. However, India-EU FTA will paralyze all these efforts. Enforcement clauses of Intellectual Property Rights provide a pretext to transnational pharmaceutical companies so that they could legitimately file a lawsuit on civil and criminal law basis with respect to Indian judicial procedure by taking advantage of infringement of Intellectual Property Rights as a reason and easily gain excessive compensation. Furthermore, the clauses define generic medicines as a forgery and thus allow the pharmaceutical companies to confiscate the generic medicines. Thus the clauses of Intellectual Property Rights interrupt the import and export of generic medicines via India.

In 2001, leukemia patients in S. Korea were pressed to pay more than 3,000USD per month for purchasing Glivec by Norvartis because of Glivec patent. Instead of fighting against their diease and taking care of themselves, they had to fight against Norvartis, demanding a decrease of Glivec price and an enlargement of insurance coverage on the street for more than a year and half. However, Korean government decided the price of Glivec at a level of over 2,700USD per month as per Norvartis’s request, and the Korean Intellectual Property Office dismissed compulsory licensing claim by the patients. Some patients then could not have other choices but buying Veenat, generic medicine of Glivec at 130USD per month which accounts for less than one twentieth of Glivec, from Natco, Indian pharmaceutical company. Moreover, Roche, Swiss pharmaceutical company, has not declined to provide Fuzeon, AIDS medicine to S. Korea through national health insurance of S. Korea since 2004 simply on the grounds that Roche is not satisfied with the Pharmaceutical Pricing of S. Korea. The Korean Intellectual Property Office also dismissed compulsory licensing claim against Fuzeon. S. Korea has already compelling Patent protection like the US.

Under these circumstances, Korean National Assembly rushed through the ratification of KORUS FTA on Nov 22. KORUS FTA contains not only Approval-Patent linkage, Data Exclusivity, and investor-state dispute, but also clauses ensuring establishment of a medicines & medical devices committee and independent review body that enable the US to Korean pharmaceutical pricing system and Korean policy on pharmaceutical products. KORUS FTA that will bring a huge increase of the price of pharmaceutical products and the extension of monopoly period in medical product will be recorded among the most horrible and worst medicine and medical supplies-related agreement.

We demand immediate nullification of KORUS ratification. Life of patients across more than 120 countries depends on whether or not Indian government protects ‘Pharmacy of the World’. Indian government must instantly stop India-EU FTA and dismiss the litigation of Norvartis.

Nov 28, 2011

Solidarity for HIV/AIDS Human Rights Nanuri+[ Korean Pharmacists for Democratic Society/ Korean Gay Men’s Human Rights Group/ Public Pharmaceutical Center/ Solidarity for Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Human Rights of Korea]

Korean Federation of Medical Groups for Health Rights[ Association of Korea Doctors for Health Rights/ Association of Physicians for Humanism/ Korea Dentists Association for Health Society/ Korea Health and Medical Workers Union/ Korean Pharmacists for Democratic Society]

Korean Organization for Patient Group

Korea HIV/AIDS Network of Solidarity

People living with HIV/AIDS community KunGangNanuri

Korea Leukemia Patients Group

Korea Kidney Cancer Association

Korean GIST Patients Group

Health Right Network

Make of Pharmacist’s Future

Korean Progressive Network Jinbonet

Intellectual Property Left

Cultural Action

Dary

Democratic Labor Party Sexual Minor Committee

New Progressive Party Youth/student committee Department of Women

WanByun

Giant Girls

People’s Solidarity for Social Progress

Democratic Legal Studies Association

Solidarity Against Disability Discrimination

Korean House for International Solidarity

All Together

Korean Pubic Service Workers’ Union

Korean Health Care Workers’ Trade Union

Trade & Democracy Institute

Korea Progressive Academy Council

Progressive Strategy Council

For more information Contact

Name: Jaecheon Kim

Position: Director of international solidarity

Organization: Nanuri+-Solidarity for HIV/AIDS Human Rights

Contact Address: 110-370, 3F Myodong Building, Myo-Dong 183, Jongro-gu, Seoul, Korea

Telephone number: 82-2-745-7942

Fax number: 82-2-744-7916

Email address: jaekim@gmail.com

Cellphone: 82-10-8238-9057

2011-11-26