Member states gathered in Geneva this week to negotiate a key addition to the Pandemic Agreement ahead of the World Health Assembly next month. Major obstacles remain, but a positive outcome would help the world better prepare for future pandemics.<\/p>\n
It is a crucial week for the World Health Organization (WHO) and its ability to establish mechanisms that would allow the world to better anticipate and respond more effectively to a future pandemic. Member states have given themselves until Saturday to finalise the \u201cannex\u201d, a crucial component of the Pandemic Agreement, adopted last year at the World Health Assembly (WHA).<\/p>\n
Speaking to journalists from ACANU, the Association of Correspondents Accredited to the United Nations, WHO director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said he had been in the room where the negotiations were taking place shortly before addressing the media: \u201cWhere there is a will, there is a way. I continue to believe that a consensus on the annex is possible.\u201d<\/p>\n
The annex concerns the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) system, which stipulates that when a virus emerges, its genome should be shared as quickly as possible so that vaccines and other medical countermeasures may be developed rapidly. \u201cMember states are doing their best,\u201d the WHO chief added, expressing hope that a consensus can be reached by the end of the week. If not, the current session could be extended, another round of negotiations could take place before the WHA, scheduled in Geneva from 18 to 23 May \u2013 or even continue beyond that.<\/p>\n
Early detection<\/p>\n
Adopting the annex is all the more important as it will determine the fate of the pandemic agreement. The ratification process cannot begin until the annex is approved. Without this crucial addition, the agreement would lack a core component.<\/p>\n
Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO\u2019s lead on epidemic and pandemic preparedness, stressed its importance: \u201cThe PABS system will enable early detection of new pathogens. Public health professionals and legal experts are currently working on how to implement such a mechanism legally. The annex is central to pandemic preparedness.\u201d<\/p>\n
Yet major obstacles remain. Countries in the global south say they are ready to share new pathogens that may emerge on their territory, but expect compensation from the global north in the form of vaccines and treatments. So far, northern countries \u2014 home to powerful pharmaceutical industries \u2014 have insisted that benefit-sharing resulting from pathogen data should remain voluntary, a proposal that has frustrated countries in the global south.<\/p>\n
WHO chief scientist Sylvie Briand put the issue into perspective: \u201cIn 2011, we had a similar discussion, but it was about a single pathogen \u2013 influenza. That was much easier. Today, we are dealing with many more pathogens. It is more complex, which makes a pandemic agreement with an annex even more necessary.\u201d<\/p>\n
Redefining multilateralism<\/p>\n
Antoine Flahault, emeritus director of the Global Health Institute at the University of Geneva, said the position of southern countries is understandable: \u201cThey experienced the Covid-19 pandemic, during which they benefited from only limited generosity from the north. There were no technology transfers.\u201d<\/p>\n
The epidemiologist remains optimistic: \u201cI believe Europeans are more eager than Africans to reach an agreement. I find it hard to imagine they would walk away from a positive outcome.\u201d In the event of failure, he warned, the WHO\u2019s multilateral governance system could be called into question.<\/p>\n
Flahault added: \u201cIf an agreement is reached, it is likely to be relatively favourable to the global south, which has set clear red lines. That would be a significant step forward and could reshape the contours of a new multilateralism, paving the way for greater economic sovereignty across regions.\u201d<\/p>\n
Van Kerkhove also highlighted the role of the private sector: \u201cAlthough negotiations are between member states, pharmaceutical companies are highly engaged and acting constructively.\u201d The hope is that they will show greater flexibility on intellectual property rights in the interest of the common good.<\/p>\n
Ghebreyesus concluded with a message that contrasts with current trends toward health unilateralism in the United States: \u201cSolidarity is our best immunity.\u201d<\/p>\n