Understanding Compulsory Licensing: A Sri Lankan Perspective by Anomi Wanigasekera

Understanding Compulsory Licensing: A Sri Lankan Perspective by Anomi Wanigasekera. In The Global IP Matrix Magazine Issue 23, Anomi Wanigasekera, Senior Partner at Julius & Creasy, delves into the topic of compulsory licensing within the Sri Lankan legal context. As global conversations around equitable access to medicines and innovation intensify, this article sheds light on how Sri Lanka’s legislative framework aligns with international IP agreements like TRIPS, while retaining sovereign flexibilities.

Patent Protection and Legal Foundations

Sri Lanka’s IP landscape is governed by the Intellectual Property Act No. 36 of 2003, aligned with the TRIPS Agreement and Paris Convention. Patents are granted for 20 years and protect both product and process inventions that meet the criteria of novelty, inventiveness, and industrial applicability. The Act outlines the exclusive rights of patent holders, such as exploitation, assignment, and licensing, but also identifies limitations, particularly when public interest demands override exclusivity.

Defining Compulsory Licensing

Compulsory licensing allows third parties to use a patented product or process without the owner’s consent under specific conditions. Wanigasekera highlights that while patent rights are typically exclusive, exceptions exist under emergencies or when prior licensing attempts fail. This mechanism is crucial for public health, national security, and sectors vital to the economy. Legal Provisions in Sri Lanka

The IP Act of Sri Lanka allows compulsory licences in three situations:

1. Failed attempts to obtain voluntary licences on reasonable terms.

2. National emergencies or circumstances of extreme urgency.

3. Dependent patents that require the use of another patent.

These licences must be non-exclusive, time-bound, and primarily serve the domestic market while offering fair compensation to the patent owner.

Global Precedents and Local Implications

Although Sri Lanka has not yet exercised compulsory licensing for pharmaceutical products, the author draws parallels to countries like India and Thailand, which have used it to ensure drug accessibility. Wanigasekera argues that Sri Lanka must remain ready to utilise this legal tool, especially in the face of future health emergencies or affordability challenges in the public sector.

Conclusion

Compulsory licensing represents a critical policy lever for balancing innovation incentives with public welfare. As Wanigasekera articulates, Sri Lanka’s robust legal framework ensures readiness to act when national interest demands equitable access to patented technologies, especially life-saving medicines.

Read the full article in The Global IP Matrix Issue 23 for a comprehensive overview of Sri Lanka’s compulsory licensing laws and their potential impact on public health and IP governance.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE NOW!