Latest news with #PriceMarkingforDrug
Asia News Network
4 days ago
- Business
- Asia News Network
Malaysian doctors fight medicine price rule
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.
Malay Mail
30-07-2025
- Health
- Malay Mail
Public education on medicine price transparency will persist despite judicial review by doctors, says health minister
PUTRAJAYA, July 30 — Health Minister Datuk Seri Dzulkefly Ahmad today said education efforts on medicine price transparency will continue without interruption, despite medical practitioners pursuing a judicial review against the government's price control policy. In this case, Dzulkefly said the ministry supports the right to pursue judicial review, but advocacy efforts must continue while the legal process takes its course. 'As a minister, I welcome and respect the judicial process. We were also previously subjected to judicial review under the Medicines (Price Control) Act 852. 'As such, I support the idea of allowing the process to proceed. In the meantime, our educational and advocacy efforts must continue. We cannot afford to pause just because a judicial review is underway,' he told reporters in a press conference after officiating the National Health Technology Assessment Conference 2025 here. He explained that suspending all enforcement would create a gap, emphasising that the ministry's educational enforcement must continue until the court reaches a decision. Yesterday, seven medical associations and a general practitioner from Sabah applied for a judicial review against a government directive requiring private clinics to display retail drug prices, arguing that the directive oversteps ministerial authority and may undermine professional medical practice. The application was filed in the Kuala Lumpur High Court last Thursday by 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 Dr Saifulbahri Ahmad. The applicants, who named Dzulkefly, Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister Datuk Armizan Mohd Ali, and the federal government as respondents, argued that the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Marking for Drug) Order 2025 exceeds ministerial powers, as Section 10 of the Act does not cover medications administered during treatment under Section 19 of the Poisons Act 1952. Gazetted on May 1, the Price Marking for Drug Order 2025 came into force with a three-month window before full enforcement begins on August 1.
The Star
29-07-2025
- Business
- The Star
Doctors fight medicine price rule
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.
The Star
29-07-2025
- Business
- The Star
Private doctors file lawsuit against government over medicine price display regulation
PETALING JAYA: Doctors from the private sector are suing the government over the rule governing the display of medicine prices. This comes after several private practitioners filed for judicial review on July 24 against the government in the Kuala Lumpur High Court. The application was filed on Tuesday (July 29) by 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 Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Minister, the Health Minister and the government of Malaysia were named as the first, second and third respondents respectively. 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, which is also the impugned order in this case. As part of the relief, they are also seeking a declaration that the impugned order is void as it is 'tainted with illegality, irrationality and unreasonableness, disproportionality and impropriety.' 'The enforcement of the Impugned Order, insofar as its application to private healthcare facilities and/or registered medical practitioners and dentists, be stayed until full disposal of the Applicants' application for judicial review,' read the statement of the claim of the case. Among the grounds for judicial review is the government's failure to recognise the difference between drugs sold by retail and those administered for treatment. It also 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 drug providers, with the sole focus 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 adding 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 that drug prices in clinics are determined by variables such as manufacturers, freight charges, import or export duties, importers, distributors, volume purchased, the location of the clinics, different formulations of the same product, provisions for wastage of expired or unused drugs and staff and administrative expenses. The price display rule that came into effect on May 1 was met with much resistance by private healthcare practitioners. A three-month grace period has also been given, where no compounds would be issued and the government would instead focus on advocacy and education. The case management has been set for Aug 22.
New Straits Times
06-05-2025
- Health
- New Straits Times
Implementation of medicine price display not meant to burden private doctors
PUTRAJAYA: The Health Ministry (MOH) has assured that the implementation of the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering Act 2011 is not intended to disrupt the operations of private medical practitioners, but to promote transparency and affordability in healthcare. In a statement today, the ministry said the law, which requires clear labelling of medicine prices at private healthcare facilities and community pharmacies, is part of efforts to build a more equitable and sustainable healthcare system. The clarification came after more than 300 general practitioners (GPs), dressed in black, staged a peaceful protest near the Prime Minister's Office in Putrajaya. The two-hour demonstration culminated in the submission of a memorandum opposing the enforcement of the Act on the medical profession, which was received by the Prime Minister's senior private secretary, Aznur Hafeez Kaswuri. Among other demands, the GP community is calling for the Act to be reviewed, proposing that the regulation of medical practice remain under the Private Healthcare Facilities and Services Act 1998, which they argue already provides sufficient oversight. "MOH remains committed to an open and inclusive approach. "Engagement sessions with all stakeholders have been held and will continue, to ensure balanced implementation that does not unduly burden any party," the ministry said. Representatives from several professional bodies took part in the protest, including the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia, the Federation of Private Medical Practitioners Associations Malaysia and the Malaysian Private Dental Practitioners Association. The ministry said it is open to reviewing the contents of the memorandum and considering improvements to current policies based on evidence and data, but stressed that public access to affordable medicines remains a key priority. The price labelling initiative, enforced under the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Marking for Drug) Order 2025, came into effect on May 1 in a joint effort by the Health Ministry and the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Ministry.
