0
In March 2018, LEGN conducted a Regional Workshop on legislation on antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance in Bangkok, Thailand. National regulators from 10 countries in South-East Asia joined the workshop, together with representatives from the tripartite (OIE and WHO) and the regional organizations (ASEAN). Over two full days, participants discussed the status of their respective national legal frameworks in a number of areas relevant to AMR.
This workshop represented the first opportunity for LEGN to present its methodology for legal work on AMR and was successfully received by both countries and partner organizations. LEGN’s proposed methodology is based on:
- the analysis of national legislation in all areas with an impact on AMR, including but not only legislation on veterinary medicinal products, pesticides, food safety, feed, aquatic and terrestrial animal health and production, environmental protection or water;
- the establishment of coordination mechanisms to ensure a multidisciplinary approach to legal reform;
- the identification of legal weaknesses and analysis of potential regulatory options to resolve existing gaps; and
- participatory approaches to legal reform to introduce the policy priorities agreed upon in the National Action Plans (NAPs).
There are, in LEGN’s view, a number of regulatory options that could serve to address AMR policy priorities, such as the regulatory control over the use of antimicrobials for non-therapeutic purposes, the restrictions in the sale and use of medicated feed, or the need for prescription to sell and use antimicrobials. Different countries in Asia have adopted innovative measures to regulate the use of antimicrobials for growth promotion with interesting legal implications, such as the need to clarify what can be defined as prevention, control or therapeutic use as opposed to growth promotion. At this stage, different regulatory possibilities, from blanket prohibitions to the risk-based approach, are being analyzed and, at the workshop, countries presented their own experiences while also engaging actively in the consideration of other potential alternatives.
One of the conclusions of the workshop was that, in many countries, legislation is not sufficiently updated to ensure appropriate control over activities that may cause AMR. A second conclusion that emerged was the challenge of ensuring coordination among the different competent authorities with a role in the gamut of areas with an impact on AMR. It became clear that there is a need to take urgent action to combat AMR and to ensure that legislation is aligned with national policy priorities to ensure their enforceability and sustainability.
Also highlighted was the importance of a regional approach: regional collaboration can facilitate coordination, improve data collection and analysis, or promote harmonized regulatory approaches. Countries agreed on the need to set up a network of regulators to share expertise and experiences and to initiate proposals for regional harmonization. Finally, participants requested FAO to hold another workshop in one year’s time, when some of the countries will have moved forward in the analysis and revision of their national regulatory frameworks.
Next steps include the implementation of country support for legal revision in the countries that are part of the Fleming Fund 2 Project (funded by the United Kingdom) and, if possible, to look for additional funding to replicate this workshop in other regions, commencing in Africa.
April 2018/ Development Law Magazine - Issue #1 of 2018/ FAO.
http://www.fao.org
