A/70/279 72. Although exclusions, exceptions and flexibilities are fully part of international intellectual property law, such as the TRIPS Agreement, they remain optional fro m the perspective of trade law. From the perspective of human rights, however, they are often to be considered as obligations. B. Importance of public participation and transparency 73. Currently, considerable concern is being expressed that intellectual property policy-making in bilateral and multilateral forums tends to be conducted amid great secrecy, with substantial corporate participation but without similarly well -informed participation of elected officials and other voices representing the public interest. There is concern that international trade treaties are being used to drive and delimit domestic patent policies, short-cutting democratic processes and discussions and in contradiction to article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which protects the right of every citizen to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives. 27 74. Such concerns have been widely publicized recently by civil society groups around treaties currently under negotiations, in particular the Trans -Pacific Partnership Agreement (Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States of America and Viet Nam), and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, involving the European Union and the United States). 75. The investor-state-dispute settlement chapters included in such agreements are likewise viewed as increasingly problematic, as they put at risk the regulatory function of many States and their ability to legislate in the public interest. The problem is aggravated by the “chilling effect” that intrusive investor -state-dispute settlement awards have, when States are penalized for adopting regulations, for example, to ensure access to generic and essential medicines. 27 76. Research and development costs are usually forwarded by corporations to justify high prices for their patented products. Far more transparency ab out actual costs is needed. C. Examples of good practices 77. Some WTO members use TRIPS flexibilities in favour of the right to benefit from scientific progress, particularly in the area of health. Among several public health sensitive flexibilities, section 3(d) of the amended 1970 Indian Patent Law provides a list of products not considered as “inventions”, excluding from patentability, for example, new uses and most new forms of existing drugs. The provision led to the Novartis case, when the patent office refused to register a new form of Glivec, a drug used for treating blood cancer. In April 2013, the Supreme Court of India rejected the appeal of the company, which had failed to prove the improved therapeutic efficacy of the new version of a previously known substance. __________________ 27 15-12543 Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, “United Nations experts voice concern over adverse impact of free trade and investment agreements on human rights”, 2 June 2015; available from http://www.ohchr.org/FR/NewsEvents/Pages/ DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16031&LangID=E. 19/26