This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.

In its latest study, the Pharmaceutical Security Institute (PSI) documented a 60 percent increase in arrests for persons involved in counterfeiting, diversion or theſt of pharmaceutical drugs worldwide between 2008 and 2009. Te PSI further reported that the sale of counterfeit drugs tripled between 2004 and 2009, resulting in worldwide annual sales of up to $200 billion.

Unfortunately, this meteoric rise, perhaps not so coincidentally, has taken place while the world is mired in the worst global recession in decades. In many places, unemployment is at an all-time high, forcing at least some to turn to illicit industries for work. As money gets tight, people also look for lower-priced alternatives. Today, this oſten means turning to the Internet, which enables otherwise small criminal organisations to become worldwide players in the trafficking of illicit healthcare products in relative anonymity. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that up to 50 percent of the drugs sold on the Internet from unauthorised sites are fake.

To make matters even worse, most law enforcement and corporate security departments have seen significant reductions in their personnel and/or operating budgets during this same period. Tis has forced them to narrow their focus. For law enforcement, this typically means focusing on violent crimes, and for corporations, it means protecting the company’s assets and personnel. While most healthcare companies list

their brands among the most

valuable assets on their balance sheet and law enforcement agencies are genuinely concerned with public health and safety, sadly neither have the scope nor expertise to combat this increasingly sophisticated and global crime on their own.

For example, ports in Chile and Peru have increasingly become destinations for illicit products made in Asia. While interdictions and arrests in Chile and Peru have been on the rise, unfortunately there is rarely any follow-up action taken against the individuals in Asia who are manufacturing or distributing the product. Te case ends and the criminal enterprise remains in place to ship products the next day. Obviously, law enforcement lacks the resources, connectivity and jurisdiction to dismantle these syndicates all on its own.

Even in these budget-challenged times, there is a way to successfully counter illicit product sales, secure the healthcare supply chain for patients and protect a company’s brand. Te answer lies in building and investing in close operational partnerships with law enforcement. Unlike other industry support groups, these operational partnerships are designed to build a practical working relationship between industry and law enforcement to target healthcare and IPR crimes. While there are a number of quality groups that fit this description around the world, there are two that every multinational corporation with brand security issues should join.

Cargo theft

One of the fastest-growing crimes affecting healthcare products is cargo theſt. In the US alone, the FBI estimates that cargo theſt accounts for up to $30 billion in losses each year. While the crime itself is relatively straightforward, it can have a wide-ranging impact for law enforcement, companies and consumers alike.

Te Southeast Transportation Security Council (SETSC) is successfully tackling this issue on a daily basis. SETSC was founded in 2002 by five corporations and approximately 12 law enforcement officers operating in the Atlanta area. From those modest beginnings, it has rapidly grown to include more than 40 corporations and more than 200 law enforcement agencies throughout the Southeastern United States. Te organisation currently monitors and deals with cargo theſts valued at over $1 billion annually.

Te framework of the programme is quite simple. Within 30 minutes of a cargo theſt incident, SETSC’s ‘Blast-Fax System’ passes all the relevant information to hundreds of police agencies, four law enforcement cargo theſt task forces, seven regional councils, plus its corporate membership. Te information is disseminated on a controlled- access basis, which means the law enforcement membership can have access to the full details of the theſt, while information can be redacted in the version distributed to corporate partners. All members and law enforcement agencies then work together to recover the cargo.

Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review 2011 27 / pierivb

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84