Representatives of the 194 member countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) participate in the 77th World Health Assembly which takes place in Geneva, Switzerland, from May 27 to June 1.
This edition, whose motto is “All for health, health for all”, aims to central axis define whether the deadline is extended to reachr an International Treaty for the Prevention, Preparedness and Response to Pandemics, better known as the “Pandemic Treaty”. Although the Member States of the WHO they agreed finalize the negotiations of the agreement by May 2024, in order to present it during the Assembly, in the end it was not possible to reach a consensus text.
“Over the last 2 years, WHO Member States have dedicated enormous efforts to address the challenge posed by COVID-19 and respond to the losses it has caused, including at least 7 million of lives lost, he pointed recently Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director general of the WHO.
“We need to take advantage of the World Health Assembly to regain energy and finish the work at hand. This is presenting to the world an agreement on pandemics for a generation,” Ghebreyesus highlighted.
What is the Treaty on Pandemics promoted by the WHO? Because it is important? And what is Argentina’s position on the matter? We explain it to you in this note.
What is the pandemic treaty?
In November 2021, The 194 member countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) agreed to begin drafting and negotiating a “Treaty on Pandemics”: a international agreement to strengthen prevention, preparedness and response to future pandemics on a global scale.
The president of the European Council, Charles Michel, presented The proposal was first proposed at the Paris Peace Forum on November 11, 2020. Almost a year later, at an extraordinary meeting of the World Health Assembly, WHO member states agreed to establish a negotiating body to draft said agreement and officially begin negotiations.
Within the framework of 76.to World Health Assembly, held in May 2023, the first status report of the project was presented. The objective was to have the proposed instrument by May 2024, with the idea of presenting the closed document within the framework of a new assembly. However, the 194 states have not yet reached a consensus text for approval and it is being debated whether to extend the deadline to reach an agreement.
It is the first time that the WHO has prepared an international document of this magnitude. Until today, the only tool that the organization has at a global level to expedite decisions when a disease has a serious impact on public health is the International Health Regulations (RSI or IHR). This regulation was born in the 1950s, with the purpose of initially monitoring and controlling 6 communicable diseases: cholera, plague, yellow fever, smallpox, relapsing fever and typhus. It was last updated 19 years ago, in 2005.
Why is an international treaty on pandemics important?
“No government or institution alone can confront the threat of future pandemics,” explained the European Council.
According to analyzes of reports from the United Nations Organization (UN)he world Bank and the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), The health emergency revealed a “lack of global unity” that “deepened global asymmetries,” especially in terms of access to vaccines, concentration of wealth, income and technology. In this way, developing countries found themselves most vulnerable facing the advance of the coronavirus pandemic than the most developed countries.
“COVID-19 has brought to light the numerous flaws in the global system of protecting people from pandemics: the most vulnerable people are left without vaccines; health workers do not have the necessary equipment to carry out their life-saving work; and ‘me first’ approaches hinder the global solidarity needed to confront a global threat,” he pointed on this aspect the director general of the WHO.
For his part, Charles Michel, president of the European Council, express when presenting the idea of a pandemic treaty during the Paris Peace Forum: “We consider it absolutely essential to be able to act more quickly and in a more coordinated manner, guarantee the availability of medical equipment and exchange information between us very quickly to protect our citizens in the best way possible.”
Finally, the WHO details on its official site that the new agreement could remedy the deficiencies that the pandemic highlighted, in particular in the following areas:
- Global Preparedness and Response Agreements that contribute to predicting, preventing and responding to future pandemics more effectively.
- Sustained and predictable financing for preparation and response to health emergencies.
- Technology transfer. Research and innovation must be open, so that its results can be accelerated. Unrestricted access to diagnostics, vaccines, medications and the respective technologies to produce them is demanded.
- Governance and oversight mechanisms to increase trust, ensure accountability and promote transparency.
What is Argentina’s position?
Argentina is one of the 194 member countries of the WHO that participates in the negotiations of the international treaty. The Nation’s Ministry of Health is represented at the World Health Assembly by Silvia Prieri, Chief of Staff. From the health portfolio they pointed out Checked that “Our country will not sign any pandemic agreement that could affect issues of national sovereignty and existing capabilities.”
And they added: “the Argentine Republic, as a member of the WHO and State party to the International Health Regulations (2005), fully supports the mission of the WHO as a governing and coordinating institutional authority with the purpose of achieving the highest level of health. However, concern is evident about the amendment process to the 2005 Health Regulations and we appeal that said process comply with the established prior consultation times and processes.”
In recent days, the block of deputies of La Libertad Avanza (LLA) sent a draft declaration to express “concern and rejection about the probable existence of a pandemic agreement.”
The document was presented by the national representative for Entre Ríos, Beltrán Benedit, and bears the signatures of 14 other members of the bloc. The text maintains that the approval of a pandemic agreement and/or the modification of the IHR “would restrict and replace the health sovereignty of the Argentine Republic”. This situation would not only affect “health in a broad sense (physical and mental),” but would “attack the freedom and property of the citizens of our country.”
What misinformation is circulating about the Treaty?
Several disinforming narratives have been circulating since 2022 in relation to the possible approval of a pandemic treaty, such as that The WHO would have the authority to dictate protocols and processes to member countries in case of health emergencies, or that US President Joe Biden would have signed an “anti-pandemic treaty” that gives the WHO powers above the constitutions and laws of the States. However, Checked verified in different notes that these contents are false.
The WHO is a technical advisory body. It can make recommendations to countries about what to do to improve the health of their citizens and what measures to take to prevent the outbreak of diseases, but it cannot enforce those recommendations: It does not have the ability to force or sanction its members.
“As with all international instruments, any new agreement, as long as it is sanctioned by the Member States, would be determined by the governments themselves, which would adopt any measures taking into account their own internal laws and regulations,” indicates the organization in relation to the treaty on pandemics.
What could happen if countries that join or participate in any new agreement do not meet their obligations? It would correspond to the acceding countries decide whether and which compliance mechanisms will be included in the new agreement. “It is a general principle of international law that once an instrument of international law has entered into force it is binding on the parties to that instrument, and that the parties are obliged to comply with it in “good faith.”
Catherine Régis, senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law of the University of Montreal and co-director of the Center for Health Policy, Organizations and Law (H-POD), explained to AFP Factual: “It is not possible for the WHO, independently of any treaty, to de facto govern States, without going through governments/parliaments.”