A/HRC/29/44 29. During the interactive dialogue, comments were made by representatives of Colombia, India, Mexico, the Colombian Commission of Jurists, Knowledge Ecology International, the People’s Health Movement-Safe Observer International, Third World Network, Universities Allied for Essential Medicines, as well as by Dr. Bermudez, Dr. Schiavon and Regina Kamoga, Executive Director, Community Health and Information Network, Uganda. They discussed the following: South-South cooperation; patent monopolies; TRIPs-plus provisions in free trade agreements; the fundamental unfairness of intellectual property regimes, particularly for middle income countries; definition of “essential medicines”; alternatives to TRIPS; the role of WTO; contribution of universities to innovation and development of medicines; barriers to research and development; antibiotic resistance and the challenge from intellectual property regimes that hampered the supply of effective antibiotics; the positive role of TRIPs in spurring innovation; the need for more compulsory licensing in developing countries. 30. In her closing remarks, Ms. Forman referred to the responsibilities of States in ensuring access to all medicines, not only essential medicines, and asserted that the current system of TRIPs exceptions and flexibilities was inequitable. The Optional Protocol to the Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which had entered into force on 5 May 2013, established a legally binding petitions procedure, an important mechanism for interpretation and enforcement of the right to health. Mr. Taubman reiterated the importance of policy coherence across legal and policy regimes. He called for intellectual property experts to develop a stronger understanding of public health issues, and for health practitioners and policymakers to gain a practical understanding of TRIPS flexibilities. Ms. Romero noted that different countries had different needs, but that analyses of national legal strategies were helpful in implementing the TRIPS agreement and its flexibilities. Improved local production capacity facilitated access to medicines. F. Lessons learned and emerging challenges in the global response to AIDS 31. Martin Choo, Asia Pacific Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS (APN+), stressed the importance of equitable access and effective treatment. He asserted that access to treatment was a human right, treatment made patients feel human, and effective treatment was a public good. However, patients were being left behind, and many of those so left behind were from vulnerable social groups including the poor, sex workers, drug users and lesbian, gay, transgender, transsexual and intersex persons. He argued that patients should not be mere statistics. In the Asia Pacific region, almost 40 per cent of people infected with HIV/AIDS were not receiving treatment. Depression and mental illness were highly prevalent amongst people with HIV but they often went untreated as well. In national legislatures APN+ had strongly advocated that people living with HIV had the right to have access to treatment. APN+ also worked to extend treatment and community support to the most vulnerable. 32. Alma de Leon, Regional Director, International Treatment Preparedness Coalition, Latin America and the Caribbean, explained that many medicines available in the developed world were not available in Latin America. Children often had little access to treatment, which might, however, be reduced or eliminated when they became adults for lack of the third line of drugs, which were inaccessible in some countries because of their high price. The new development goals must accelerate universal coverage and eliminate gaps in access to medicines. Universal health care would only become a reality if the people’s demands were met and if human rights prevailed over intellectual property rights. She called on the international community to break down barriers to access and pursue international trade and investment laws that permitted access to affordable medicines. The 10