Advocacy group questions Medanta MD Naresh Trehan’s inclusion in panel on pharma marketing practices

Naresh Trehan, chairman and managing director of Medanta. File

The Working Group on Access to Medicines and Treatments has raised concerns over including Dr. Naresh Trehan, chairman and managing director of Medanta, in a committee constituted on the Supreme Court’s directions to examine the regulatory framework governing pharmaceutical marketing practices.

In a representation to the Department of Pharmaceuticals, the advocacy group urged the government to replace Dr. Trehan with a member free of potential conflicts of interest, arguing that the panel’s independence and impartiality must be safeguarded.

The committee has been tasked with examining the regulatory framework governing pharmaceutical marketing practices and making recommendations on the voluntary Uniform Code for Pharmaceutical Marketing Practices (UCPMP), 2024.

The group said Dr. Trehan’s financial interests and association with the Medanta Group could give rise to a potential conflict of interest. It stressed that the committee’s deliberations and recommendations should be guided solely by public health considerations and the need to promote ethical practices and access to affordable healthcare.

Citing a 2018 report, the group referred to the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority’s (NPPA) examination of hospital bills across four hospitals, including Medicity-Medanta, which identified instances of overcharging. It also cited subsequent Supreme Court proceedings and assessments by State drug regulatory authorities in Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, and Karnataka concerning high markups in hospital tariffs.

The group said these concerns warranted scrutiny of the committee’s composition to ensure that its recommendations were transparent, impartial and guided by public interest.

While clarifying its support for consultations with a broad range of stakeholders, the group said its objection is specifically regarding the inclusion of a member whose financial interests raise questions about impartiality. Allowing such concerns to undermine the committee’s independence would defeat the purpose of the apex court’s directions, it added.

The representation called on the Department of Pharmaceuticals to reconstitute the panel by appointing a member without such conflicts of interest.