In the XX century legal doctrine intellectual property is characterized by absolutization of property rights of patent holders whose interests are placed above the interests of society by international law. However, in the XXI century this postulate is being rethought towards finding of the balance between private and public interest. For this very reason, this century is marked by the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, and the Association Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part, on the other part, which lays down a separate provision regarding patents and public health (article 219).

The purpose of the article is to outline modern scientific tasks which the intellectual property doctrine faces today and which solution is very powerfully demanded by society, resting upon the priority of human rights over property rights of intellectual property.

It is established that the way modern society understands the morality of the process through which the results of intellectual activity in the area of medicine and pharmacy are monopolized undergoes significant changes returning it to the model of the rule of natural human rights. Therefore, one of the priority tasks is to “reset” the modern intellectual property doctrine towards prioritizing the patient’s interests. Modernity steers us towards a certain decommercialization of intellectual property rights in the area of medicine and pharmacy, since the goal of law is lost – which is to regulate public relations with the maximum preservation of the interest of their participants.

The comparative legal method used made it possible to conclude that any monopolization of knowledge in the area of medical care contradicts the Fundamental Human Rights, which include such ones as the Right to life and the Right to health. This is why in the EU, legislation does not consolidate any provision for patenting the techniques and methods of treatment, diagnostics and surgical interventions. The TRIPS Agreement entitles the Member States to determine, at own discretion, the scope of legal protection provided in the healthcare area. Subsequently, there emerges the issue of implementation of the flexible provisions of the TRIPS Agreement at the level of national legislation, and this is the issue requiring the presence of appropriate political will to formulate the appropriate public policies. At the present stage, the existence of such will is demonstrated by legislative initiatives of various political forces at the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine of the IX convocation. KEYWORDS: human rights; intellectual property right; patents in the area of medicine; patent for a medicinal product; harmonization of human rights.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Jhering Rudolph Ritter von, The Struggle for Law (Callaghan and company 1915) (in English).

2. Oestreich G, Geschichte der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten im Umriss (Auflage 1978) (in German).

Edited books

3. Balasubramaniam K, ‘Access to Medicines: Patents, Prices and Public Policy – Consumer Perspectives’ in Drahos P and Mayne R (eds), Global Intellectual Property Rights. Palgrave Macmillan (2002) (in English).

4. Cranston M, ‘Human Right, Real and Supposed’ in Raphael D (ed), Political Theory and the Right of Man (1967) (in English).

5. Dzheims V, Prahmatyzm [Pragmatism] (P Nasada per, Alternatyvy 2000) (in Ukrainian).

6. Koller P, ‘Sfera znachushchosti prav liudyny’ [‘The Scope of Human Rights Significance’] v Filosofiia prav liudyny [Philosophy of Human Rights] (Hosepat Sh ta Lomann H red, O Yudin ta L Doronicheva per z nim, Nika-Tsentr 2008) (in Ukrainian).

7. Tishhenko P, ‘Jeticheskie problemy razvitija biotehnologij’ [‘Ethical Issues of Biotech nology Development’] v Biojetika i gumanitarnaja jekspertiza [Bioethics and Humanitarian Expert Examination], vyp 2 (Majlenova F otv red, IFRAN 2008) (in Russian). 8. Tsyppelius R, Filosofiia prava [Philosophy of Law] (Prychepii Ie pereklad, Tandem 2000) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

9. ‘The price of drugs for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is a reflection of the unsustainable prices of cancer drugs: from the perspective of a large group of CML experts’ [2013] 121(22) BLOOD 4439–42 (in English).

10. Bodenheimer E, ‘Philosophical Anthropology and the Law’ [1971] 59(3) California Law Review 563 (in English).

11. Brugger W, ‘Menschenrechte im modernen Staat’ (1989) 114 Archiv des offentlichen Rechts 537–9 (in German).

Websites

12. ‘Extension of export waivers on EU generics and biosimilars: Press Releases’ (European Parliament, 17.04.2019) <https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/ 20190410IPR37607/extension-of-export-waivers-on-eu-generics-and-biosimilars> (accessed: 20.01.2020) (in English).

13. William J, ‘What is Pragmatism’ <https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/ works/us/james.htm> (accessed: 20.01.2020) (in English).

14. Anderson R, ‘Farmatsevty shaleniiut vid vysokykh prybutkiv’ [‘Pharmacists Get Mad Because of High Profits’] (VVS News, 11.11.2014) <https://www.bbc.com/uk rainian/business/2014/11/141110_pharmaceutical_industry_dk> (accessed: 20.01.2020) (in Ukrainian).

15. Prokopchuk S, ‘Mykola Amosov: “Fizychnoho Boha nemaie, ale ideia Boha ye. Bez nei ne bude mitsnoi morali, stiikoho suspilstva”’ [‘Mykola Amosov: “There is No Physical God, But the Idea of God Exists”’] (Uriadovyi kur’ier, 30.12.2011) <https://ukurier. gov.ua/uk/articles/mikola-amosov-fizichnogo-boga-nemaye-ale-ideya-bog> (accessed: 10.02.2020) (in Ukrainian).

16. Tkachuk B, ‘Naidorozhchi u sviti liky rozihruvatymut v lotereiu’ [‘The World’s Most Expensive Medicines Will Be Raffled Off’] (Hromadske Telebachennia, 23.12.2019) <https://hromadske.ua/posts/najdorozhchi-u-sviti-liki-rozigruvatimut-v-lotereyu> (accessed: 20.01.2020) (in Ukrainian).