PFIZER : VICTIMS ABANDONED

Monday, November 29, 2010 23:01

Aondoakaa’s secret deal with Pfizer
By Musikilu Mojeed


The terms of the agreement reached between the Federal Government and pharmaceutical giant, Pfizer that led to the withdrawal of federal charges against the pharmaceutical giant over the deadly 1996 Trovan paediatric clinical trial in Kano remain unknown because of the nature of deal brokered by former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mike Aondoakaa.
Last week, the Kano State governor, Ibrahim Shekarau, broke ground for the construction of a multimillion dollar hospital to be built by Pfizer as part of the agreement between the state government and the company. But nothing has been heard about the federal government deal.
Others involved in the deal, which saw Mr. Aondoakaa withdrawing the $6 billion suit the Federal Government instituted against Pfizer, were lawyers Maryam Uwais, Tunde Irukera and Yemi Osibajo, a former Lagos State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice.
Ms Uwais, Mr. Osibajo and Mr. Irukera represented the government in the suit and thus negotiated the confidential settlement agreement with Pfizer on behalf of Mr. Aondoakaa and the Federal Ministry of Justice.
The withdrawal of the case, as well as the terms of settlement, is a highly guarded secret by the parties involved in the negotiation.
The amount of money that changed hands in the deal and the terms of the agreement are however not clear, as all parties to the deal insisted that the settlement was covered by a confidentiality clause.
They declined to disclose details of the agreement in spite of repeated prodding by NEXT that the Kano Pfizer case is of great public concern and that Nigerians, and indeed the world, need to know every detail of its resolution.
Genesis of the dispute
The Federal Government and the Kano State Government had filed two separate cases against Pfizer over the controversial drug trial. The company had tested the antibiotic Trovan on 200 sick children during a meningitis outbreak in 1996. Eleven children reportedly died and others were blinded, paralysed or brain-damaged.
In the cases, both filed in May 2007, the federal government sought more than $6 billion in damages and the Kano State government wanted $2.075 billion in damages for, among other things, the costs incurred to provide treatment, compensation and support for the alleged victims and their families; the costs of unrelated health initiatives that failed, allegedly due to societal misgivings attributable to the Trovan study; and general damages.
On July 30, 2009, Pfizer and Kano entered into a well-publicised $75million settlement agreement, pursuant to which Kano State agreed to dismiss the civil and criminal actions.
Pfizer in turn agreed to (i) establish a healthcare/meningitis fund from which participants in the 1996 study can receive financial support in an aggregate amount up to $35 million; (ii) fund, in the amount of $30 million within a two-year period, various healthcare initiatives chosen by the Kano State government for the benefit of the people of Kano State; and (iii) reimburse Kano State for $10 million in legal costs incurred in connection with the litigation.
Silent federal government
But the Federal Ministry of Justice, under Mr. Aondoakaa, did not announce at anytime that it had withdrawn the $6 billion case against the American pharmaceutical company.
Some Nigerians thus believed that the case was still in court.
However, investigations by NEXT revealed that the former minister and the lawyers hammered out a secret settlement in October 2009 and agreed to keep the deal under wraps.
Shortly afterwards, Pfizer, in a quarterly report on November 5, 2009, informed the United States’ Security and Exchange Commission that the Nigerian Federal Government had discontinued the litigation against it.
The report did not disclose what the terms of settlement are and how much was paid to the Nigerian government.
It only said, “In October 2009, the parties entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which the Federal Government of Nigeria agreed to dismiss the civil and criminal actions with prejudice. And Pfizer agreed to pay the legal fees and expenses incurred by the Federal Government in connection with the litigation.”
Our investigations indicate that no money was paid to government’s coffers in respect of the settlement, and it is not clear who received the payment made by Pfizer in lieu of “legal fees and expenses incurred by the Federal Government.”
Claims and counter claims
When contacted, Mr. Aondoakaa said it was Ms Uwais and her colleagues who negotiated with Pfizer directly, holding meetings with representatives of the pharmaceutical firm in London and Dubai and later receiving an undisclosed amount from the company.
“I don’t know about this money you are talking about,” Mr. Aondoakaa said on the telephone. “I didn’t touch a kobo. The initial proposal we sent was that Pfizer should do something at the National Hospital but President Yar’Adua said no, that Pfizer money was blood money. So, the lawyers were dealing with Pfizer directly and the matter was still on when I left office.” (A NEXT check proved otherwise: the agreement was reached in October 2009 and Mr. Aondoakaa was Attorney General till his removal on February 10, 2010).
The former minister directed further enquiries on the matter to the incumbent justice minister, Bello Adoke. But Mr. Adoke in turn said Mr. Aondoakaa was better placed to answer questions on the withdrawal of the case and the terms of settlement.
“He (Mr. Aondoakaa) is the person who decided the issues of the case before I came here as the AGF,” Mr. Adoke said. “As for the terms of the settlement ... what I am told is that the case was settled under a non-disclosure legal term.”
Mr. Irukera, one of the government’s lawyers, also debunked Mr. Aondoakaa’s claim that he (the former minister) was not involved in the negotiation, saying the former Attorney General held several meetings with Pfizer in the run-up to the withdrawal of the case.
“As counsel, we did not directly interface with Pfizer in reaching this resolution,” Mr. Irukera said in an interview. “However, we were informed as counsel that the FGN in its discussions with Pfizer agreed that in exchange for dismissing the civil action with prejudice and the criminal charges and executing a non-prosecutorial agreement, Pfizer will reimburse the FGN for its expenses in prosecuting the cases including fees to professionals and out of pocket expenses by the government. We only signed the agreement in support of the FGN’s signature and received our fees directly.”
The lawyer wouldn’t say how much his team received from Pfizer.
Oath of secrecy
The other counsel, Ms. Uwais, declined to respond to specific questions on the matter. “Unfortunately, responding to the thrust of your many questions would breach our confidentiality obligations,” she said in response to an email from NEXT.
Pfizer also insisted that the secrecy of the agreement couldn’t be broken. Marco Winkler, a spokesperson for the company, explained that in the settlement, “the Federal Government agreed to dismiss its civil and criminal actions with prejudice and Pfizer agreed to pay legal fees and expenses incurred by the Federal Government in connection with the litigation”.
Mr. Winkler wouldn’t disclose who received the payment made by his company and how much was involved.
“The specific terms and conditions of the settlement agreement are covered by a standard confidentiality clause and thus may not be disclosed,” he said in an email to NEXT from the New York headquarters of the company.
Our investigations however showed that such discrete resolution of cases have no place in Pfizer’s home country. Around the same time that Mr. Aondoakaa and the lawyers made the deal with the company, the U.S. Department of Justice forced the pharmaceutical giant to cough out $2.3 billion for off-label promotional practices involving four of its drugs (Bextra, Zyvox, Geodon and Lyrica) and allegations certain payments to healthcare professionals involving these and nine other Pfizer drugs.
In addition, in September 2009, the company reached agreements with attorneys general in 42 US states and the District of Columbia to settle state civil consumer protection allegations related to promotional practices concerning Geodon. The states wrested $33 million from the company for the violation. The terms of settlement of those cases are at the disposal of the American public.