Dr. Mathias Schmidt, a German pharmacist and scientist, has urged Fiji to leverage diplomatic means to encourage Germany to resolve the legal issues that have prohibited kava from entering the German market for over two decades.
Dr. Schmidt, who has been involved in this case since the initial ban imposed by Germany’s food and drug regulator BfArM was overturned by a German court in 2002, explained to this newspaper that the recent court ruling does not guarantee that kava can legally enter the market.
He noted, “Currently, the product can technically be introduced into the market, but on the other hand, the regulatory authority is warning that any attempts will result in significant backlash.” This reflects the ongoing legal dispute involving a coalition of 12 pharmaceutical companies seeking to market kava and the persistent objections from BfArM, which has repeatedly obstructed court decisions favoring kava.
Dr. Schmidt expressed concern that the pharmaceutical companies in Germany may be losing motivation after prolonged legal battles spanning almost 24 years. “They have been fighting since 2000, and now it is 2024, making it a total of 24 years seeking market authorization,” he stated. He highlighted the financial strain on these companies due to legal expenses and their dwindling motivation, saying, “They question the point of continuing if they are not earning any income from kava.”
The original group of 12 companies has reportedly shrunk to just two, according to Dr. Schmidt.
He emphasized the need to seize the momentum from the recent German court ruling to exert pressure on Germany, suggesting that engagement from Fiji’s government could be impactful. “I believe Germany’s Foreign Minister, Annalena Baerbock, would be open to understanding this situation,” he added.
Dr. Schmidt called for high-level discussions within the South Pacific governments with the German Foreign Affairs ministry, urging them to convey that the ban remains unjustified even after court validation.
The latest court hearing occurred in May 2024, with a ruling issued on June 18; however, Dr. Schmidt mentioned that BfArM is still appealing this decision as of July 23.