Peru: INDECOPI criticizes creation of price regulator in pharmaceuticals; advocates greater competition
Peru’s National Institute for the Defense of Competition and Intellectual Property (Indecopi) considers that the promotion of competition in the pharmaceutical products market should be prioritized ahead of the creation of a price regulator, as proposed by Congress.
During the second session of the Congress working group that analyzes the more than ten bills presented on the subject, Indecopi representative Humberto Ortiz considered that measures that generate competition such as greater access to generics should be given priority, over concrete actions affecting the retail market. “We, as Indecopi, advocate empowering competition in those markets where it can be empowered,” Ortiz said.
Dissenting from this opinion, Crisólogo Cáceres, president of the Peruvian Association of Consumers and Users (Aspec), emphasized that the constitutional system is empowered to regulate prices and that access to health is restricted by the concentration found in the pharmaceutical distribution sector after the purchase of Inkafarma by Mifarma. For his part, Luis Lazo, president of Foro Salud, added that there is a permanent blockade of private companies from public contracts to purchase medicine. “The State can not guarantee access to the health of citizens at a fair price,” he said.
In support of Indecopi’s point of view, business associations such as the Chamber of Commerce of Lima, the Association of Pharmaceutical Laboratories (Alafarpe), Comex Peru and the Peruvian-German Chamber considered that although there are still issues to be improved in the medicines market, price controls would not be ideal because it could generate shortages of medicines and fail to achieve the desired objective.
Full Content: La Republica
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand