Powerful WHO Members Hint at Delay in Pandemic Talks if No Legal Certainty on Pathogen Information Pandemic Agreement 09/02/2026 • Kerry Cullinan Share this: Share on X (Opens in new window) X Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook Print (Opens in new window) Print Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky Indonesia delivering a statement at IGWG5 on behalf of the Group of Equity. Powerful member state blocs at the World Health Organization (WHO) stressed on Monday that they will not compromise on the final outstanding piece of the Pandemic Agreement simply to meet the May deadline. The Group of Equity and the WHO’s Africa, Eastern Mediterranean and South-East Asia regions stated that they wanted a Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) system with legal certainty at the second-to-last meeting of the Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG). “PABS is the heart of the Pandemic Agreement. If the heart is weak, the body cannot function, and the agreement will not deliver equity,” said Indonesia on behalf of the Group of Equity, and the three regions – collectively representing over 80% of the world’s population. The PABS system aims to set out how countries can share information about pathogens and their genetic sequence data and ensure that those sharing this information get access to the benefits developed as a result, such as vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics. But the current PABS draft contains “major loopholes” that will prevent the system – an annex to the Pandemic Agreement – from functioning effectively, Indonesia added. “The annex must articulate the operational details of the PABS System, and provide legal clarity on the rights and obligations of the providers of PABS material and sequence information, as well as various users of the system. We also question how any terms and conditions can be enforced when users are permitted to remain anonymous,” stressed Indonesia. “We understand the pressure of timelines. But we should be clear about the choices and decisions in front of us: We are aiming for an annex by [the World Health Assembly in] May, that can actually deliver a functioning PABS System in totality. But if we cut too many corners now, we will pay for it later in credibility and implementation.” Zimbabwe – speaking for the Africa Group – stated that “a system that safeguards some while leaving others exposed is not only unjust, it is ineffective”. “For the Africa Group, equity and benefit-sharing must be operational, enforceable and central to Pandemic Agreement, including the PABS annex. These elements cannot be aspirational, deferred or left to voluntary implementation. Past experiences has shown the consequences of such approaches.” Pragmatism and speed The EU representative and France’s Anne-Claire Amprou. However, the European Union, backed by G7 leader France, called for pragmatism and speed. “We remain deeply committed to work towards an effective, workable and implementable PABS system in the remaining 12 Days of negotiations that we have at our disposal,” said the EU representative. “We hope that a sense of pragmatism and common sense will help to guide us towards convergence on the key remaining outstanding areas for the purpose of bringing this process to a successful conclusion within the timeframe.” Speaking for France, Anne-Claire Amprou, a former co-chair of the Pandemic Agreement negotiations, urged “quick progress” to adopt the annex by the World Health Assembly in May. “Given the time remaining, we need to be reasonable in terms of the amendments we make to the text,” said Amprou. “We invite member states not to reopen subjects or provisions which were already adopted as part of the Pandemic Agreement.” The Pandemic Agreement cannot be endorsed or operationalised without the PABS annex, which means there is no global agreement on how to approach the next pandemic – which can strike at any time. Benefit-sharing demands India warned against adopting an ambiguous annex. But for many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the bitter memory of being unable to get access to vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic – even for health workers and their most vulnerable citizens – was a sobering lesson. Some indicated that they would be prepared to miss the May deadline rather than budge on their demand for a legally binding PABS system that balances access and benefit-sharing. India, speaking for the South-East Asia region, stated that “it is essential that quality is not compromised by the pressure of timelines”. “Our priority must be an annex that provides clear legal certainty with minimum room for interpretive ambiguity. Such clarity is critical for effective implementation and long-term trust in multilateralism, “ said India. “Benefit-sharing obligation must be proportionate to access and cannot be voluntary, aspirational or based on ‘best endeavours’. Non-monetary benefits Some LMICs also stressed – as India did – that benefit-sharing must extend “beyond monetary contributions and donations of vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics”. “Non-monetary benefits, including timely capacity development, technical assistance and non-exclusive manufacturing licences for developing countries, must be clearly specified and applied both during pandemics and during the inter-pandemic period,” said India, for the South-East Asia region. Indonesia said that, while equitable access to vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics (VTDs) is essential, “we should also be serious about benefits that support timely diversified regional and local production, including non-exclusive licensing to manufacturers in developing countries, transfer of technology, and meaningful collaboration in R&D.” “Benefit sharing cannot depend on purchasing power, ad hoc arrangements or discretionary decisions taken during emergencies,” said Namibia. “It must be triggered by access, governed by multilateral rules and delivered when it matters most. Namibia also places strong emphasis on technology transfer and regional manufacturing capacity. Strengthening local and regional production is essential to reducing dependency and building real resilience.” Way forward The IGWG meeting – the fifth of six – ends on Saturday, and while it plans four evening sessions, co-chair Tovar da Silva Nunes reminded delegates that the meeting’s access to interpreters is limited, a casualty of WHO budget cuts. There are 100 days to the deadline, and by the end of this week’s talks, it should be clear whether the annex is on track for adoption in May. Mexico, meanwhile, indicated that it is available to facilitate “dialogue between blocs of countries”. “We are convinced that, with political will and pragmatism, we can reach the necessary consensus so that we can allow this process to conclude successfully and strengthen our multilateral stance for future pandemics.” said Mexico. Share this: Share on X (Opens in new window) X Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook Print (Opens in new window) Print Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky Combat the infodemic in health information and support health policy reporting from the global South. Our growing network of journalists in Africa, Asia, Geneva and New York connect the dots between regional realities and the big global debates, with evidence-based, open access news and analysis. To make a personal or organisational contribution click here.