Counterfeit medicines, from cancer therapies to antibiotics and treatments for chronic disease, are becoming a more sophisticated and entrenched threat in the Philippines, prompting calls for steeper sanctions and the criminalization of medicine counterfeiting during a high-level dialogue hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines (AmCham). Speakers flagged the rising incidence of falsified oncology, cardiovascular, TB, and HIV drugs, underscoring the urgent need for stronger legal deterrence.
Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) Acting Director General Atty. Nathaniel S. Arevalo shared that the agency sees the need for higher penalties for counterfeit medicines. Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights carries criminal liability under the Intellectual Property Code.
“The counterfeit medicines are not ordinary fake goods, Arevalo asserted”. “Counterfeit medicines endanger lives, and our laws must reflect the seriousness of this offense.”
Arevalo also emphasized that existing fines imposed under current laws are no longer adequate. “If penalties remain low, counterfeiters will simply treat them as the cost of doing business. We need sanctions strong enough to deter, not just penalize,” he said.
Participants at the forum likewise raised alarm over recent seizures where supposed cancer drugs, HIV treatments, and life-saving antibiotics were found to contain contaminants or, in several cases, nothing more than water. These cases, they noted, reveal how counterfeiters are shifting toward high-value and high-demand medicines, exploiting patient desperation and persistent barriers to access.
Arevalo shared new IPOPHL data showing that pharmaceutical and medical products now account for 8 percent of all counterfeit goods tracked nationwide as of November 2025. From January to October, 70 percent of counterfeit drugs intercepted were prescription medicines, many meant for serious or life-threatening conditions.
He warned that counterfeit operations are becoming increasingly sophisticated. “Some imitations are so precise that even trained professionals can be deceived,” Arevalo said, pointing to the reuse of authentic packaging and the rapid expansion of online sellers.
During the Q&A, IPOPHL IP Rights Enforcement Office Supervising Director Atty. Christine Pangilinan-Canlapan underscored the need to pursue the source of counterfeit operations, not just small-scale resellers.
“We cannot rely only on seizing products at the retail level,” she said. “To dismantle these networks, we must go after manufacturers and major distributors, and that requires stronger, clearer criminal provisions in our laws.”
PHAP Executive Director Teodoro “Ted” Padilla also urged legislators to move decisively. “If legitimate, affordable access is lacking, counterfeiters will fill the gap,” Padilla said. “But access alone isn’t enough, we need laws that make counterfeiting medicines a serious crime, with serious consequences.”
Industry representatives supported the policy direction, noting that without meaningful sanctions, counterfeit networks will continue to operate with impunity.
While multiple laws touch on counterfeit drug enforcement, speakers agreed that the existing framework remains fragmented and outdated. IPOPHL reiterated its call for Congress to prioritize amendments that define medicine counterfeiting as a criminal offense, impose higher penalties, and empower regulators with modern enforcement tools, including faster case build-up and site-blocking authority against online offenders.
The forum closed with a unified appeal for legislative action. “Every counterfeit medicine that enters the market must be dealt with decisively,” Arevalo said. “We need stronger laws, stiffer penalties, and stronger resolve.”
