Market imbalance: Doctors say unfair pharma competition harms clinics.
PETALING JAYA: The medicine price display rule has been challenged in court by several doctors who want the order to be quashed.
The doctors filed for a judicial review, saying the rule hurts small clinics and was introduced without proper consultation.
They want the rule, which took effect on May 1, to be revoked.
The lawsuit named the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister, Health Minister and the Federal Government as the first, second and third respondents, respectively.
The applicants are the Association of Private Practitioners, Sabah (APPS), the Malaysian Medical Association (MMA), the Malaysian Association for the Advancement of Functional and Interdisciplinary Medicine (Maafim), the Organisation of Malaysian Muslim Doctors (Perdim), the Federation of Private Medical Practitioners Associations Malaysia (FPMPAM), the Malaysian Private Dental Practitioners’ Association (MPDPA), the Society of Private Medical Practitioners Sarawak (SPMPS), and one Dr Saifulbahri Ahmad.
The lawsuit was in relation to the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Marking for Drug) Order 2025, which came into effect on May 1.
The medical practitioners are seeking an order of certiorari to quash the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Ministry’s Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Making for Drug) Order 2025 (ministry’s order).
According to the statement of claim of the suit filed on July 24, they are also seeking a declaration that the ministry’s order was void and tainted with illegality, irrationality, unreasonableness, disproportionality and impropriety.
They asked that the enforcement of the ministry’s order “insofar as its application to private healthcare facilities and/or registered medical practitioners and dentists” be stayed until the judicial review case is over.
Among the grounds for the judicial review is the failure of the government to recognise the difference between drugs sold in retail and drugs administered for treatment purposes.
It added that the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister had breached principles of natural justice by arriving at the decision without consulting registered medical practitioners represented by the MMA.
They said that while the purpose of the regulation was to curb profiteering activities, it has created unwarranted competition among providers of drugs, with the singular denominator purely being the price of drugs.
“This means even small-scale community clinics operated by general practitioners (GPs) and specialists have to now compete with large-scale drug retailers, for example, international chain pharmacies who already enjoy a larger market control and the ability to gain further control of retail customers by selling drugs at a much lower price,” they said.
They added that small-scale community clinics would be at a disadvantage if forced to enter into an unwarranted competition with large-scale pharmaceutical companies.
They said drug prices in clinics are determined by variables such as manufacturers; freight charges; export or import duties; importers; distributors; volume purchased; location of the clinics; different formulations of the same product; provisions for wastage of expired unused drugs; and staff and administrative expenses.
The price display rule was met with much resistance by private healthcare practitioners.
A three-month grace period from May 1 has also been given, where no compounds would be issued and the government would instead focus on advocacy and education.
According to the court’s website, the suit is set for case management at the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Aug 22.
