Obama hits ‘corporate deserters’ like Pfizer

Obama hits ‘corporate deserters’ like Pfizer

PFIZER KILLED NIGERIANS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kano_trovafloxacin_trial_litigation

Abdullahi v. Pfizer, Inc.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  (Redirected from Kano trovafloxacin trial litigation)

The Kano trovafloxacin trial litigation arose out of a clinical trial conducted by the pharmaceutical company Pfizer in 1996 inKano, Nigeria, during an epidemic of meningococcal meningitis. To test its new antibiotic, trovafloxacin (Trovan), Pfizer gave 100 children trovafloxacin, while another 100 received the gold-standard anti-meningitis treatment, ceftriaxone, a cephalosporinantibiotic.^[1] Pfizer gave the children a substantially reduced dose of the ceftriaxone. The allegation is that this was done to skew the test in favor of its own drug.^[2]

Five children given trovafloxacin died, as did six of those given ceftriaxone. The lead investigator, Dr. Abdulhamid Isa Dutse, later provided a letter of approval for human trials that was found to be falsified.^[1] The Nigerian government called the trial "an illegal trial of an unregistered drug."^[3] The participants and their families were not told that they were part of a trial, and that Médecins Sans Frontières was offering the standard treatment in another part of the same building.^[4] Pfizer acknowledged reducing the dose of the standard treatment, but said this was done to minimize injection-site pain, and that the mortality rates in both the trovafloxin and ceftriaxone arms of its trial were lower than among those treated with chloramphenicol by Médecins Sans Frontières.^[5]

The survivors of the trial tried to bring a number of legal actions against Pfizer in the United States. These resulted in four judicial opinions, the first three dismissing the claims on procedural grounds.^[3] According to Ben Goldacre, Pfizer argued that it was not required to obtain informed consent for experimental drug trials in Africa, and that any case should be heard in Nigeria.^[4] In May 2006 Representative Tom Lantos of California, the senior Democrat on the House International Relations Committee, described the findings of a report compiled about the case by the Nigerian government as "absolutely appalling," and called for Pfizer to open its records.^[3]In January 2009 the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the Nigerian victims and their families were entitled to bring suit against Pfizer in the United States under the Alien Tort Statute. Pfizer subsequently settled the case out of court with a $75 million settlement that was subject to a confidentiality clause.^[4]

Overall, the 1996 meningitis epidemic in northern Nigeria killed about 12,000 people, during the worst known meningitis outbreak inSub-Saharan Africa.

In 2002, a group of Nigerian minors and their guardians sued Pfizer in theUnited States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs alleged that “they suffered grave injuries from an experimental antibiotic administered by defendant Pfizer Inc. (“Pfizer”) without their informed consent.”^[6] On 29 August 2001, plaintiffs brought this action under the Alien Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1350,^[7] to recover damages for Pfizer’s alleged violations of the Nuremberg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki, theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and customary international law (otherwise known as the “law of nations”).

The District Court summarized the Nigerian plaintiffs’ allegations as follows:

In the mid-1990s, Pfizer developed Trovafloxacin Mesylate, an antibiotic that is also known by its brand name as “Trovan.” Pfizer projected that its total annual sales could exceed $ 1 billion a year. (Compl. P 96.) Beginning in 1996, Pfizer conducted the largest drug testing program ever undertaken by enrolling thousands of participants in clinical tests. (Compl. P 97.) However, prior animal testing indicated that Trovan might cause significant side effects in children such as joint disease, abnormal cartilage growth (osteochondrosis, a disease resulting in bone deformation) and liver damage. (Compl. PP 98-99.)

In 1996, epidemics of bacterial meningitis, measles and cholera besieged the impoverished Nigerian city of Kano. (Compl. PP 2, 5, 101.) In April 1996, six weeks after it first learned of the epidemics, Pfizer dispatched a medical team to establish a treatment center at Kano's Infectious Disease Hospital (“IDH”). (Compl. PP 2, 8, 101-02, 101-07, 109.)

In addition to Pfizer team, humanitarian organizations such as Medecins Sans Frontieres ("MSF"), also known asDoctors Without Borders, traveled to Kano’s IDH to treat the sick. (Compl. P 5.) The medical teams operated under squalid conditions in a hospital consisting of several single story cinder block buildings, some of which lacked electricity and running water. (Compl. P 110.) The beds were filled to capacity and patients seeking care overflowed on to the hospital's grounds. (Compl. P 110.) Plaintiffs allege that while MSF and other organizations offered safe and effective treatments for bacterial meningitis, Pfizer embarked on a medical experiment involving the “new, untested and unproven” antibiotic “Trovan.” (Compl. PP 2-3, 6, 8, 95.)

To travel to Kano, Pfizer needed the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (“FDA”) authorization to export Trovan. On 15 March 1996, Pfizer informed the FDA of its intent to conduct the Kano study. (Compl. P 108.) Thereafter, Pfizer obtained a 20 March letter from the Nigerian government and a 28 March letter from IDH’s ethics committee permitting Pfizer to export Trovan to Kano. (Compl. P 108.) Although both letters predate Pfizer’s departure for Kano, plaintiffs allege that no IDH ethics committee existed as of 28 March 1996 and that the 28 March letter was back-dated in response to a 1997 FDA audit. (Compl. PP 132-33.) Pfizer,^[8]

Plaintiffs further contend that Pfizer’s sole purpose for traveling to Kano was to expedite the FDA's approval of Trovan to treat pediatric victims. (Compl. P 7.) Prior to Kano, only one child had ever been treated with Trovan, and then only after all other antibiotics failed. No child had ever received it orally. (Compl. P 105-06.) According to plaintiffs, Nigerian officials allocated to Pfizer two of IDH’s wards to conduct the testing. (Compl. P 113.) Pfizer selected, from lines of those awaiting treatment, children ranging in age from one to thirteen years who exhibited symptoms of neck stiffness, joint stiffness, and high fevers with headaches. (Compl. P 3, 115.) Pfizer divided them into two groups and treated half with Trovan. (Compl. P 3.) The other half was “purposefully ‘low-dosed’” with ceftriaxone, an FDA-approved drug shown to be effective in treating meningitis. (Compl. P 125.) In order to enhance the comparative results of Trovan, Pfizer administered only one-third of ceftriaxone's recommended dosage. (Compl. P 3, 124-25.)

Meanwhile, MSF established their headquarters in tents beside the IDH due to space constraints. (Compl. P 111.) There, MSF admitted their sickest patients to hospital beds in the IDH and confined the less ill to floor mats in their tents. (Compl. P 112.) MSF treated pediatric meningitis patients with chloramphenicol, a drug recommended by theWorld Health Organization to treat bacterial meningitis in epidemic situations. (Compl. PP 11, 111.)

Pfizer’s protocol also called for the children selected to have their blood tested on arrival and five days later. (Compl. P 126.) If a child was not responding well to Trovan, Pfizer switched his or her treatment to ceftriaxone. (Compl. P 126.) Plaintiffs allege, however, that Pfizer neglected to analyze the patients’ blood samples and therefore could not determine if a patient had a negative reaction until the manifestation of a visible and permanent injury. (Compl. P 126.) Plaintiffs further allege that low-dosing ceftriaxone resulted in injuries and deaths among the control group. (Compl. P 3.)

Although Pfizer’s protocol called for its team to obtain consent from the parents of the children treated who were too young to sign, few parents could speak or read English. (Compl. P 127.) Plaintiffs claim that Pfizer failed to explain to the children’s parents that the proposed treatment was experimental, that they could refuse it, or that other organizations offered more conventional treatments at the same site free of charge. (Compl. PP 3, 117-20, 128-30, 154-55, 157.) After two weeks, the Pfizer team left Kano and never returned for follow-up evaluations. (Compl. P 122.) Plaintiffs allege that five children who received Trovan and six children whom Pfizer “low-dosed” died. (Compl. P 120.) Others suffered paralysis, deafness and blindness. (Compl. PP 16-50.)

On 30 December 1996, Pfizer applied with the FDA for approval to market Trovan in the United States for various uses including the treatment of pediatric infectious diseases. (Compl. P 216.) In June 1997, FDA inspectors discovered inconsistencies in the data resulting from Pfizer’s Kano treatments. (Compl. P 217.) Thereafter, regulators informed Pfizer that they planned to deny its application to use the drug against epidemic meningitis and expressed several concerns including Pfizer's failure to conduct follow-up examinations. In response, Pfizer withdrew its application. (Compl. P 217.)

On 18 February 1998, Pfizer launched Trovan after it received FDA authorization for treatment of a number of adult illnesses. (Compl. P 218.) Shortly thereafter, Pfizer and the FDA received reports regarding Trovan patients suffering liver damage. (Compl. P 219.)

In January 1999, the FDA recommended that Trovan be prescribed only for patients in nursing homes or hospitals suffering from life-threatening conditions. (Compl. P 223.) That following June, the FDA issued a public health advisory on liver toxicity associated with oral and intravenous Trovan following post-marketing reports of acute liver failure strongly associated with the drug. (Compl. P 224.) The FDA announced that it received reports of more than 100 cases where Trovan patients exhibited clinically symptomatic liver toxicity and advised physicians to use Trovan only for patients who met certain criteria. (Compl. P 224-25.) In addition, Pfizer agreed to limit distribution of Trovan to hospitals and long term nursing facilities. (Compl. P 224.) Further, the European Union's Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products suspended all sales of Trovan in part due to results from the Kano tests. (Compl. PP 221-22.)^[2]

In response to Plaintiffs’ allegations, Pfizer filed a motion to dismiss, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,^[9] alleging that the Plaintiffs’ fail to plead a violation of the law of nations, because their actions did not fit the narrow exceptions when a private party will be held liable for the “law of nations.” However, the court denied the motion to dismiss on these grounds, because the complaint sufficiently alleged that Pfizer had worked in concert with the Nigeria government, thereby Pfizer acted as a “de facto state actor.”

Next, Pfizer sought dismissal on grounds of forum non conveniens. Despite the plaintiff’s claims that the Nigerian court system is corrupt and could not provide an adequate alternative forum, the court ultimately found that Nigeria did provide an adequate alternative forum and the “Gilbert factors” weighed in favor of transferring the case to Nigeria. Accordingly, the court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss this action on grounds of forum non conveniens, provided Pfizer consented to suit and acceptance of process in Nigeria; Pfizer waived possible statute of limitation problems; Pfizer made available documents and employees, and; Pfizer agreed to return to the United States if Nigeria declined to accept jurisdiction.

Abdullahi v. Pfizer, Inc. II

United States Court of Appeals.

The Nigerian Plaintiffs appealed from the District Court’s order of final judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.^[10]Pfizer cross-appealed denial of its motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court of Appeals reviewed the forum non conveniens dismissal under the “clear abuse of discretion” standard. The Court of Appeals, however, revisited the Court’s analysis of the adequate alternative forum. While under normal circumstances Nigeria appeared to be an adequate forum, in rare cases this may not be enough. “If the plaintiff shows that conditions in the foreign forum plainly demonstrate that plaintiffs are highly unlikely to obtain basic justice, a defendant’s forum non conveniens motion must be denied."^[11] The Court of Appeals noted that plaintiffs had submitted a number of affidavits from State Department andUnited Nations officials to buttress their claims about corruption in the Nigerian judiciary.

Next, the Court of Appeals acknowledged that on appeal both parties had requested judicial notice of facts contained within the record of a parallel proceeding, involving different plaintiffs, in a Nigerian Court. The Court of Appeals referred to the Nigerian litigation asZango v. Pfizer (“Zango litigation”). The Zango litigation had recently been dismissed in Nigeria. The court declined to take judicial notice of the "Zango litigation", instead opting to vacate the district court’s dismissal on grounds of forum non conveniens and remanding the case to the district court to consider the implications of the "Zango litigation" on its forum non conveniens analysis.

For these reasons, the Court of Appeals vacated and remanded to the District Court.

Abdullahi v. Pfizer, Inc. III

After the Court of Appeals vacated and remanded, the District Court readdressed the dual grounds for dismissal, both dismissal pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and dismissal pursuant to the doctrine of forum non conveniens. On remand, the District Court granted Pfizer’s dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) and found that the Zango litigation did not preclude dismissal for forum non conveniens.^[12]

Adequate Alternative Forum Analysis

After setting forth the factual and procedural background the District Court turned its attention to the Zango litigation. The court’s somewhat searching review of the Zango litigation came in direct response to the Court of Appeals holding, which questioned whether Nigeria was in fact an adequate alternative forum, because the "Zango litigation" had ended in dismissal. The District Court discussed the "Zango litigation"’s procedural history, concluding that the Plaintiffs’ filed a Notice of Discontinuance, based upon the Federal High Court, “having declined jurisdiction in this matter for personal reasons.”^[13]

Next, the court addressed the Plaintiff’s allegations of corruption within the Nigerian judiciary. Although Plaintiff’s provided allegations of corruption and anecdotal evidence, the court ultimately held that Plaintiffs were unable to establish corruption and bias in the "Zango litigation". Finding instead, that dismissal was a result of the Plaintiff’s waiting “endlessly for a new judge to replace Judge Hobon,” who had recused himself for personal reasons. For these reasons, the District Court, again found that Nigeria provided an adequate alternative forum.

Applying Sosa

U.S. Supreme Court building

In finding that dismissal was also appropriate under for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, which the court mistakenly refers to as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the court relied heavily upon Sosa.^[14] Under Sosa, the Alien Tort Claims Act creates no new causes of action but confers on federal courts the power to hear a narrow set of alien tort claims for violations of international law. However, the Supreme Court did leave the door open for courts, exercising a vigorous gatekeeping function, to recognized new actionable rules based on evolving principles of international law.^[15] However, “federal courts should require any claim based on the present-day law of nations to rest on a norm of international character accepted by the civilized world and defined with a specificity comparable to the features of the 18th-century paradigms.”^[16] Having set forth the relevant standard, the court evaluated whether Pfizer did in fact violate customary international law. First, the District Court found that the Nuremberg Code, which governs scientific research on human subjects, does not contain a private cause of action. Second, the District Court found that the Declaration of Helsinki and the CIOMSguidelines does not contain a private cause of action. Instead, finding these guidelines are merely a “general statement of policy that is unlikely to give rise to obligations in any strict sense.” [Id. at 34.] Third, the District Court found that the ICCPR was not “self executing” and that a private right of action should not be implied. Finally, the District Court found that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights does not impose obligations as a matter of international law. Instead, it is “merely aspirational.” None of the sources of international law cited by the Plaintiffs were a proper predicate for jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Claims Act.

For the reasons discussed, the court granted Pfizer’s motion to dismiss, for failure to state a claim under the Alien Tort Claims Actand, even if subject matter jurisdiction were found, the action would be dismissed on forum non conveniens grounds (under the same conditions set forth in Abdullahi I).

Ajudu Ismaila Adamu v. Pfizer, Inc

The District Court recites the facts set forth in Abdullahi I, and the analysis of the Alien Tort Claims Act set forth in Abdullahi III, before turning to the claims under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act and the Connecticut Products Liability Statute. The court began by analyzing Connecticut’s choice of law principles. Under Connecticut’s qualified lex loci delicti doctrine, the District Court concluded that Nigerian — not Connecticut — substantive law governs, and accordingly, both Connecticut law claims were dismissed.^[17] In addition to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, under both the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Connecticut statutory causes of action, the court also granted the motion to dismiss on grounds of forum non conveniens, with the same additional conditions required by Abdullahi I and Abdullahi III.

Nigerian government lawsuit

On 5 June 2007, the government of Nigeria filed against Pfizer in the Nigerian Federal High Court, seeking US$6.95 billion in damages. Nigeria claimed that Pfizer "never obtained approval of the relevant regulatory agencies... nor did the defendant seek or receive approval to conduct any clinical trial at any time before their illegal conduct". After preliminary arguments, the case was adjourned until 26 June of that year.^[18]

2009 settlement

In February 2009, Pfizer decided to settle its legal case with the 200 plaintiffs. An out-of-court settlement was reached and will be put in writing at a meeting scheduled to take place in Rome, Italy in March 2009.^[19] The settlement followed months of negotiations between Pfizer and the Kano state government which represented the plaintiffs.^[19] According to Wikileaked US embassy cables, Pfizer's country manager admitted that "Pfizer had hired investigators to uncover corruption links to federal attorney general Michael Aondoakaa to expose him and put pressure on him to drop the federal cases." ^[20]

This article is outdated. Please update this section to reflect recent events or newly available information. (April 2011)

The talks were brokered by the former Nigerian military leader Yakubu Gowon and the former U.S. President Jimmy Carter.^[19]

In October 2009, it was announced that the medical records of the victims of the 1996 Pfizer Trovan clinical trial could not be found at the Kano State Ministry of Health nor at the Infectious Diseases Hospital (IDH) where the trials were conducted according to the state's Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice Barrister Aliyu Umar. The announcement was made shortly after Umar confirmed that the state government had received $10million from Pfizer as part of the $75million settlement of the protracted dispute.^[21] Additionally, the Nigerian government conducted their own investigation. This report was kept secret for five years with the only three printed copies being lost and disappearing.

Pfizer: consistently arrogant and contemptuous

 PRESS RELEASE BY

KANO TROVAN VICTIMS ASSOCIATION (TVF)

Today is declared by us as a day we set aside to go back to trenches with Pfizer Inc. of United States of America.

We are prompted to take this stand as a result of unnecessary delay tactics being employed by Pfizer Inc. and its agents in the process of compensation payment.

BRIEF ON 1996 UNAUTHORIZED AND UNTESTED

PFIZER TROVAN DRUG TRIAL

In December, 2000 WASHINGTON POST Newspaper published full report of the unauthorized 1996 Pfizer Trovan Drug Trial in Kano Federal Ministry of Health Nasidi Panel of Inquiry refers. Soon after Pfizer denied any wrong doing. The said panel was assigned to investigate the matter.

The attitude of the pharmaceutical company has been consistently arrogant and contemptuous of the government and the people of Nigeria.

Besides, all the subsequent Pfizer’s public statements on the trial contain comments that are at variance with the truth.

In fact, the team from Pfizer Central Research arrived Kano in 1996 to conduct the unauthorized trial of their new untested drug (TROVAN) at the worst possible time known as TROVAN FLOXACIN, the drug was investigational unlicensed and unapproved and the drug manufacturer wanted data on a significant number of patients to facilitate approval by the US Food and Drug Administration and Central (FDA) regulatory agency in America.

The Pfizer team used our children with severe meningitis during the epidemic, as trial subjects and all attempts to stop it failed. And when Pfizer was hurriedly leaving Kano after the unfortunate drug trial scandal, it carted away substantial number of the Trovan victims medical records, it’s local agents Dr. Abdulhamid Isa Gambo Dutse and Dr. Sanda Muhammad Wudil did the mopping up by searching and destruction of the remaining medical records Pfizer left behind.                                                                                       

We notice with dismay that Pfizer is still using some influential Nigerians who are blindly being tale-guided to assist in cheating fellow Nigerian Trovan victims of circumstances and even without any sign of an iota reflection of NATIONAL INTEREST.

What baffles us most is that how a criminal be allowed to manipulate to be a judge of his own. Is it lack of National interest or a Nigerian factor or both.

We appreciate the kind response by the Presidency and that of Kano State Governor Dr. Rabi’u Musa Kwankwaso on Trovan controversy after our recent petition to the duo exalted offices.

This time around, we are well equipped with various, viable facts and other information to continue with our struggle for justice and fairness. TVF and its lawyers have already seen the light at the end of the tunnel which earlier denied us by those who matters. We are not desperate at all.

Once, we start our new court case before a court of law, there will be no room for out of court settlement with Pfizer again. We shall never allow anybody how high to now try to intervene; just to help Pfizer to continue with its deceptive motive.

Therefore, we as full pledge Nigerians and the family of Trovan Victims are not going to fold our arms to allow agents of discord to indeed block our chances for redress in respect of our struggle for justice and fairness.

PFIZER COMMENTS AT VARIANCE WITH TRUTH ON TROVAN MATTER

The attitude of the pharmaceutical company has been consistently arrogant and contemptuous of the government and the people of Nigeria. Besides all, the subsequent Pfizer’s public statements on the Trovan trial contain comments that are at variance with the truth.

BUNDLE OF LIES

1.1            Typical example is on March 16, 2001 the then Pfizer Chairman and Managing Director Mr. Robert A. Tade had on request by the Dr. Abdussalam Nasidi Federal Ministry of Health Committee of Enquiry to produce some records and he stated that “…no such records exists or had ever existed at all….”. There was no mention of DNA reference sample at that time. But 8 years later, Pfizer claimed to have some records. Which is which? And what a confusion!

SAMPLING ERROR – 200 PARTICIPANTS FIGURE

1.2            Another ploy is the figure of patients Pfizer claimed to have treated at IDH Kano in 1996. it clearly stated in an affidavit sworn to by one Ada Okarafor on behalf of three Senior Advocates of Nigeria;

a.     Chief Anthony I. Idigbe

b.     Mr. Damian D. Dodo

c.      Mr. Muhamamd B. Adoke

That Pfizer treated only 1,441. This affidavit was sworn to at the Federal High Court Abuja in 2007

1.3            A year later on March 13, 2008 during one of the settlement meetings held in the office of former AGF and Minister for Justice, Chief Micheal K. Aondokaa in Abuja, Pfizer representative Atiba D. Adams after quoting former AG Kano Aliyu Umar when he made public the TVF recorded figure was only 192 victims. He then suggested “… from the information made available by the representative of the Kano State government (former AG Kano) Aliyu Umar that 142 patients were unaccounted for, but under the healthcare components, Pfizer had taken into account 200 patients, since no one had taken into a position that there were more than 200 patients involved in the Study. Under this component Pfizer would set up a Structured Meningitis Fund from where a nominal compensation of Ten Thousand US dollars ($10,000.00 USD) would be paid to each 200 patients involved in the official trial…..”

1.4 Argument and counter appeal ensured between our lawyers who were                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  already barricaded by AG Aliyu Umar on one hand, on the other, the TVF Chairman Alh. Mustapha Maisikeli with his lawyers, continued to fight Pfizer through the media.

1.5             Of course, we are lucky to be in custody of some Enrolment Cards, 0001, 0134, 0136 etc. So, this figure confirmed that Pfizer had treated thousands not hundreds participants. In other words it is a four figure affair not a three figure recordings. The figure which appeared in Pfizer sworn affidavit which stated 1,441 trial participants, further confirmed the four figure not the adopted 200 (tree figure) in the agreement.

1.6             Later, AG Kano advised us that such arguments would not auger well for the smooth settlement discussion. He assured us that the governor had useful discussion with General Yakubu Gowon that Pfizer will use the only 200 figure to pay the compensation to the TVF victims, no more no less.

1.7             May be it was an afterthought on the part of Pfizer lawyer Chief Anthony Idigbe that he later maneuvered and inject the idea of DNA test just to save Pfizer’s face, while forgotten that already Pfizer had committed itself deeply in the controversy it unnecessarily created.

1.8             Meanwhile, another relocated TVF (KTVA) member registered earlier as No. 193 but missing because of relocation to a different address, now resurfaced. She is MARYAM SANI ABUBAKAR SHARADA, Kano. The defunct State Reinvestigation Committee then advised TVF (KTVA) not to include any document concerning a relocated victim in our Register. It directed further that should a relocated member re-emerge in future, it should be treated separately. All her records, (Pictures, Date, Pfizer Records on the Pictures etc) are intact with Kano Trovan Victims Association. (TVF)

NEW PFIZER GIMMICKS

A key player in the new gimmicks is identified to be Mr. Anthony Idigbe SAN who by extension engaged in all sorts of dubious moves to scuttle and undermine the interest of Trovan Victims with reckless impunity just to enable his legal firm Punica to unnecessarily extort more legal fees from Pfizer Inc. thereby, the Victims’ right is tempered with, as he has been doing since the beginning of court battle with Pfizer Inc. This clearly is against Rules 47 and 39(30) (b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners Act 2007 amongst other provisions of those rules.

Possibly, due to his sanctimonious nature, Chief Anthony Idigbe silently introduced sectional and religious sentiments against the Kano victims, such a move which Chief Anthony Idigbe could not have dare taken should the Trovan matter happened in the Southern part of Nigeria.

No wonder, all the Kano indigene staff employed by HCMT Fund have been relieved of their posts since five month ago, except Delta State indigenes under the control of the Executive Secretary Mr. David Oduo who is closely monitored and control by Chief Antony Idigbe who is also from the same area as mentioned above.

Meanwhile, Mr. David Oduo is said to be engaged in misconstruing facts and trying to cover up their shortcomings in the compensation and other project affairs. Also, he appeared to be alpha and omega on the affairs of Healthcare Meningitis Trust Fund and squandering the earmarked quarterly 250,000 USD for running the affairs of the BOT. Most of the equipments said to be acquired from overseas for the hospital project are not yet mounted, while other implements already listed to be among the items said to be delivered to the site, are alleged to be missing or not available on the project site. Therefore, Kano State Government has to be conscious of this fact before taking over the Dawakin Kudu Hospital Project built by Pfizer.

MOVE FOR A TRUCE

However, it was Pfizer itself which initiated the moves for a truce through some prominent Nigerians when it found itself (Pfizer) in the limbo as at that time, two court cases were hanging in Abuja and New York. We believe all the two cases were at our (TVF) advantage.

First, it offered $5,000 to each TVF members as consolation to withdraw the two court cases, before starting a new settlement discussion on Trovan matter.

It was ostensibly discussed and argued. At the end, we (TVF) members were compelled to accept the offer on the advice by our lawyers and on the understanding that the process of the compensation will be fair and just. Not knowing that Pfizer only bribed its way out of the two pending court cases then.

M.O.U. SIGNING

Note worthy is the fact that after General Yakubu Gowon reassured the then Governor Shekarau that the whole process would be fair and just, hence, the former Governor led Kano team to London for out of court settlement and M.O.U. signing. Amongst the delegates were General Yakubu Gowon, two former Commissioners: Aliyu Umar and Aisha I. Kiru, Mustapha Maisikeli, Ibrahim Kankarofi, Ado Kurawa and the Director Press Sule Ya’u Sule.

Among other provisions of the agreement reached, it include government will nominate 3 prominent persons; one nominee from the TVF and 3 nominees from Pfizer side, for each of the two BOTs.

INITIAL VIOLATIONS/BREACH OF TRUST

Unfortunately, on arrival back to Nigeria Pfizer, former AG Kano Aliyu Umar and Mr. Anthony Idigbe connived and tempered with the whole M.O.U.

·        First, they denied us (TVF) to send our nominee to the said BOTs as provided.

·         Secondly, they lectured those appointed on how to meddle up the compensation process.

·        And further made the Healthcare Meningitis Trust Fund to be TVF’s enemy- not to do the job they are assigned to do in the agreement.

·        Also at the beginning of the HCMT Fund assignment, they appointed an Assistant Secretary Mr. Farouq I. Farouq who is an employee of Kano State Government as against the provision of the agreement which clearly stated that no Government or Pfizer employee shall be appointed on the HCMT Fund.

·        Initially started execution of HCMT Fund matters in the Cabinet Office (SSG’s office) along Ahmadu Bello Way, Kano. 

·        Printed more than 6,000 application forms which it was found to be used by Butchers wrapping meat at Suya spots and other local markets even before the Board started scrutinizing the Claimants Forms already submitted to the Board by Claimants for consideration.

·         HCMT Fund employed staff of Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital as against the provisions of the agreement.

·        Introduced some heavy allowances for themselves as sitting allowance, despite the annual One Million Naira (N1,000,000.00) already set aside for each member.

·        Acquired porch cars for each member of the HCMTF.

·        Ignored the cut-off date of three months and extended it unjustifiably    to more than a year.

·        Invited new Claimants through the media and announced publicly all confidential clues i.e. the date, month, year and place where the Trovan trial took place (recorded cassettes of this nefarious act containing the voice of one Ahmed Aminu Yola is very much with us). They do not even care about the so called CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSE enshrined in the agreement.

·        It was not provided that some members including their Chairman, HCMT Fund should go to media to discuss openly and voiced out some vital information which supposed not to be disclosed to public for reasons best known to themselves (tape recordings of such insubordination is very much available with us).

Perhaps, one of the HCMT Fund members, a former Emirate Council representative Prof. Isa Hashim who tried to convince me to accept the huge sum of money offered to us in London as bribe, but I refuse to obliged, for that he was very much annoyed with me for scuttling the corrupt offer, that made him to blackmail me in the Emirate Council.

 In fact, the Kano Emirate Council had to remove the Professor from the HCMT Fund and replaced him with the Fagge District Head Alhaji Mahmoud Ado Bayero  (we have a copy of the Kano Emirate Council letter which confirmed his removal).

In the same vein, that person warned me to desist from attacking his friends’ sons: Dr. Abdulhamid Isa Gambo Dutse and Dr. Mohamamed Sanda Wudil who were alleged to have assisted Pfizer during the trovan trial in 1996, and vindicated by the Federal Ministry of Health (Dr. Abdulsalam Nasidi Committee report of March 2001). More so, the same Professor Isa Hashim sent some fictitious allegations against me (through some NGO’s) to ICPC with the hope to tarnish my good name, but after my satisfactory appearance before the ICPC, the Authority cleared me.

DUE DELIGENCE

Another problem was the issue of provisions of the agreement reached between Shekarau administration and Pfizer. Notably the issue of allowing Pfizer to control the $75 million package earmarked for compensation and other projects.

2.1 Our legal attorneys Streamsowers & Kohn of Lagos, led by Etigwe Uwa SAN further argued that the whole agreement was faulty. The agreement as it stands has therefore breached Section 120 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nageria as the entire US $75 million should accrue to Kano State Government and NOT Private trustees or leaving Pfizer to retain some portion of the stated amount.

2.2             Due to the constitutional responsibility of the state government, that is to account for all funds accruing to the state, the board of trustees should not and could not have a final say on the disbursement of the said funds.

2.3            To a large extent, HCMT Fund role should only be limited at advisory level and ostensibly only to monitor the implementation of other projects to be executed with the proceeds of the compensation funds.

2.4            Even if the argument is advanced that the constitution of the Fund is pursuant to the agreement between Pfizer and Kano State Government, it must be emphasized that state government cannot enter into an agreement which is contrary to the Nigerian Constitution and its internal regulations.

2.5            It was therefore, the duty of Kano State Government to draw Pfizer’s attention to the need for internal constitutional and administrative processes for the disbursement of funds, ordinarily accruing to the State Government.

2.6             Such a course does not in any way, prejudices the right or interests of Pfizer and cannot therefore constitute a basis for any valid objection by Pfizer Inc.

2.7            In fact this has not been done and the sovereignty of the State has been undermined. Something that could never have happened for the sake of national interest if it were in America where Pfizer Inc. is based.

2.8            This scandalous action has devastating political implications, capable of damaging the reputation of the State leadership.

2.9            The arguments continued that the agreement intentionally created private trusts to administer public funds under the directives of Pifzer independent of and beyond the control of the State Government, and as earlier indicated in breach of the laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

2.10       Of course, a Board of trustees has the inherent advantage of aggregating persons who may represent different interest groups to work towards the same objectives. In addition, it creates a clear legal framework for the work of the group and enhances independence and integrity in the discharge of their functions, since trustees are normally appointed on the strength of character or special abilities rather than on the level of financial contributions. As is the case as in other forms of incorporated entities. Hence a board of trustees is not meant to be an alternative government as presented in this agreement – schedule II.

2.11       While other administrative modes may exist for the administration of non-profit making schemes such as the one envisaged in this situation, such as the incorporation of the Company Limited by Guarantee, pursuant to Section 26 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) Chapter C20 of the Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

2.12       It should be stressed that the law recognizes only one mode of incorporating of Trusteeship which is the procedure under Part ‘C’ of the CAMA. This procedure has not been complied with by the Boards of Trustees until they do so, they cannot discharge any legal function as prior registration is a condition even as stated in the said agreement.

2.13       Exclusively, this position assume that the interest of the State was not protected at all for the following reasons:

·        It also indicates that the agreement as it currently stands, has breached or is in violation of or in conflict with Section 120 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

·        Therefore, the total compensation money supposed to be paid in bulk to the account of Kano State Government as State funds to be applied in the manner required by the agreement after appropriation. It is to be noted that Pfizer themselves agreed that: “The funding is being provided by Pfizer as part of a broader settlement of legal issues between Pfizer and the State.” This expressly state that the funds belong to Kano State Government.

·        Payment of total compensation money of USD 75m ought to be made to the State Accountant General and not in a peace-meal fashion as the agreement envisages and; definitely not held back by Pfizer who should earn their discharge on the full payment of the money.

·        The board cannot be independent of the State, since it treats an issue of public interest under and within the State. Hence the trusteeship should be reconstituted as a Public Trust under the joint control and directive of State Government, and should not operate as an alternative government. In this regard. Reverse is the case only Pfizer control the said HCMT Fund to date.

·        Failure to explain the duty for a quantum of such funds to the people of Kano State in line with the State Governments Constitutional responsibility to account for all public funds accruing to State, as well as subjecting the disbursement of the said funds to the control of the Accountant General of Kano State and other established institutional, structures for the management of State finances. Any other practice shall be illegal and can attract Criminal Proceedings against concerned offices in the future.

·        In line with the general directions and philosophy of the Kano State Government, it is imperative that issues relating to the Pfizer trovan matter are treated with utmost regard for legalism and due process and transparency in view of the intense citizens’ interests which the matter has generated in Nigeria, the USA and other parts of the world. Therefore, the National Interest must be protected.

·        Instead of Pfizer to engage itself in rebuilding its image lost as a result of trovan matter, it allowed a foreign Punica law firm, led by one Chief Idigbe to indulge in other unwholesome procedural obstacles to hinder any possible smooth completion of the compensation payment process.

·        In what appeared to be a battle of words between Chief Idigbe and the BOT (HCMT Fund,) and a row which broke out between the same Chief Idigbe SAN and  Kano State Government hired lawyers of Simmons Cooper Partners of Lagos, Chief Idigbe threatened both the two bodies that they breached the confidentiality clause of the agreement.

·        It was just of recent that the same board of trustees members discovered that the Bode Technologies used statistical sensitively level of 0.999 which was too high and was far above internationally accepted statistical sensitivity level used for DNA comparison, it could do nothing about it, save to seek the approval, permission and or consent of Pfizer and Kano State Government. This proved that the HCMTF is not independent but dependent. The HCMT Fund wanted to request Bode Technologies to further analyze the DNA data in its custody at a lower but internationally acceptable level of statistical sensitivity with a view to seen whether more study participants could be identified.

·        Mr. Anthony Idigbe SAN acceded to the instruction to wind up HCMTF to the detriment and financial injury of the trovan victims, whose claims before the said board of trustees have not been conclusively evaluated.

·        Bode technologies of USA knew very well that it was given assignment to independently conduct the DNA analysis of all the claimants in order that the real study participants of 1996 Trovan Clinical Trial may be ascertained.

·        However, Bode technologies knew that the interest of 186 (7) claimants had pecuniary interest in the outcome of the DNA test and analysis. Body technologies knew that Healthcare Meningitis Trust Fund was set up to conduct the evaluation of the claims of all applicants to the Fund in a fair, transparent and independent manner.

·        In spite of the knowledge alluded in the above paragraph, Bode Technologies collected only 134 and not 200 DNA reference sample and not even from HCMT Fund (which earlier claimed to have delivered it), but from Pfizer American legal counsel Mr. Joe Petrosinelli and without taking any step to confirm whether the said samples had been tempered with or swapped or query Pfizer the where about of the supposed 66 missing reference samples. This is a real sampling – error Pfizer unnecessarily used.

·        Worst scenario, Bode Technologies secretly agreed with Pfizer to use a statistical sensitivity level of 0.999 which was a ridiculously high threshold knowing fully that the threshold would most likely disqualify many of the applicants and knowing that an internationally acceptable standers are below the threshold it agreed with Pfizer to set.

·        KTVA aver that Mr. Anthony Idigbe SAN knew that the board of trustees is a company limited by guarantee. Therefore, Mr. Anthony Idigbne SAN knew that not being a member, Shareholder, and the Corporate Affairs Commission Receiver appointed for Health Care Meningitis Trust Fund. To this affect Mr.  Anthony Idigbe SAN knew that being an independent Board; it was wrongful and unlawful for him or his client (Pfizer) to issue directives to the said Board including a directive for it to wind up its operations.

·        Bode Technologies knows that the more applicants whose DNA marched, the more money Pfizer had to pay out and knowingly set the parameters of the DNA analysis in such a way as to ensure that most of the 186 would not pass the DNA test so as render assistance to Pfizer in helping it avoid its due obligations to 186 claimants Bode Technologies therefore is dishonest in setting and applying such a statistical sensitivity level and such dishonesty was done knowingly to the gain of Pfizer Inc. and to the detriment of the economic interest of the 186 TVF victims.

·        It had recently came to our notice that the HCMT Fund is in the process of winding up its activities soon, and alleged that already the BOT intended to recommend a local non-governmental organization (NGO) with its head quarters in Abuja  and headed by an influential lady to collect large share of the remaining compensation money to the detriment of the trovan victims and further alleged that most of the Board of trustees members may in turn get their share if the recommendation succeeded.

·        Therefore, Kano Trovan Victims Association (TVF) avers that HCMT Fund is dishonest and lacks independence. We have lost confidence in the said board and further that as our participation in the evaluation process was based on the condition that it would be conducted by an independent Board of Trustees. We are no longer bound by any decision which it makes as it has not maintained independence.

·        Pfizer as a result of the foregoing repudiated the settlement agreements entered into with the Kano Trovan Victims Association (TVF) since, by committing a fundamental breach of the terms thereof. We, the 186 (7) victims have accepted the repudiation since 15^th March, 2013. (A copy of evidence on this is with us)

·        With the earlier facts unveiled and the above submissions, we have to say enough is enough. We are therefore humbly urging His Excellency Mr. President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan to please issue a White paper on FMH Dr. Abdussalam Nasidi panel report of 2007.

Since we are Law abiding citizens, and Pfize ignored all the provisions of the settlement agreements and went further to violate and repudiated other agreements, we have no alternative option other than to go back to the court of Law for redress.

In line with this philosophy, we have already sued Pfizer and its agents at Abuja High Court. We are about constituting a criminal case against Pfizer in Kano High Court and possibly, open another case at United States of America.

Therefore we, the 186 (7) of the Trovan Victims Forum will never allow the unwarranted sinister antics of Pfizer and its agents to succeed. We condemn in strong terms the hunky punky approach to trovan matter by Pfizer Inc.

Conclusively, this claim is written without prejudice to the right, claims and revelations TVF may have written in respect to the failed Pfizer Trovan Drug trial of 1996.

Thank you all.

Alhaji Mustapha Garba Maisikeli

Chairman, Kano Trovan Victims Association (TVF)

September