|
 A new pact is among more than 200 recommendations for shoring up the
world's defences against new pathogens made by various reviewers
following the COVID-19 pandemic that has killed more than 6.2
million people in two years.
The WHO itself is facing calls for reform after an independent panel
described it as "underpowered" when COVID-19 struck, with limited
powers to investigate outbreaks and coordinate containment measures.
A Washington-led effort to build a global pandemic prevention fund
hosted by the World Bank is among initiatives that could determine
the future of the 74-year old body.
WHAT IS THE PANDEMIC TREATY?
The WHO already has binding rules known as the International Health
Regulations (2005) which set out countries' obligations where public
health events have the potential to cross borders. These include
advising the WHO immediately of a health emergency and measures on
trade and travel.
Adopted after the 2002/3 SARS outbreak, these regulations are still
seen as functional for regional epidemics like Ebola but inadequate
for a global pandemic.
Suggested proposals for the pact include the sharing of data and
genome sequences of emerging viruses and rules on equitable vaccine
distribution.
The European Union is pushing for a ban on wildlife markets and
incentives for reporting of new viruses or variants, an EU official
told Reuters.
Member states have an August deadline to decide on an initial
version of the pact, which is backed by WHO director-general Tedros
Adhanom Ghebreyesus. He is likely to be elected unopposed for a
second term in May.
It would be only the second such health accord after the 2003
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, a legally-binding treaty
which aims to reduce smoking via taxation and rules on labelling and
advertising.
HOW DO COUNTRIES VIEW THE PACT?
The EU proposed the treaty and is its biggest backer, with support
from Britain, Indonesia, Kenya and others.
[to top of second column] |
 The United States will take part in the talks
but has opposed a binding treaty. India and
Brazil have also voiced reservations.
With so many member countries involved, securing
agreement is likely to be tricky.
HOW WOULD IT WORK?
Because its legal nature remains to be defined,
in WHO jargon the pact is an "instrument", of
which there are three types -- recommendations,
regulations and conventions. Of those,
regulations are automatically legally binding
for members unless they explicitly object.
It is not yet clear how the 2005 regulations and
the new pandemic treaty might fit together.
One suggestion is that they should be
complementary, so that existing rules apply to
local outbreaks with the treaty response only
kicking in if the WHO declares a pandemic --
something it does not currently have a mandate
to do.
It remains to be determined whether negotiators
will include compliance measures such as
sanctions.
WHAT OTHER REFORMS ARE IN THE WORKS?
Separate talks on a U.S. initiative to overhaul
the 2005 rules are taking place this week.
Washington's proposals aim to boost transparency
and grant the WHO quicker access to outbreak
sites. Several diplomats said they are likely to
prove too ambitious, with opposition from China
and others expected on national sovereignty
grounds.
China did allow WHO-led expert teams to visit
the COVID-19 epicentre in Wuhan, but the WHO
says it is still withholding clinical data from
early cases that may hold clues about the
origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Reforms to the WHO funding structure to make it
more sustainable and flexible in the event of a
pandemic are being discussed by WHO member
states in another working group.
So far the United States, which until the
pandemic was the WHO's top donor, has opposed
plans to increase member countries' annual
contributions.
(Reporting by Emma Farge; Editing by Stephanie
Nebehay and Catherine Evans)
[© 2022 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |
