|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on Health Issues (Feb25/07) Concerns over weakening of the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing System Geneva, 18 February (TWN) — As the World Health Organization (WHO) Pandemic Agreement negotiations continue in its 13th round ahead of the 2025 World Health Assembly deadline in May, experts and civil society are raising alarms over the weakening of key provisions in the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) System. The 13th meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiation Body (INB) is from 17 to 21 February, with a resumed session planned for 7 to 11 April. Colin Carlson, professor at Yale University, is part of a coalition of 290 researchers and scientists from 36 countries who has been closely monitoring negotiations. In February 2024, the coalition issued a letter calling for an accountable PABS System with concrete benefit-sharing commitments. One year later, however, Prof. Carlson expresses deep concerns over the direction of discussions. “The defining challenge of this century is preventing frequent outbreaks from escalating into public health emergencies and pandemics. If we want to do that, we must solve the problem of equitable access. There is no point in reaching an agreement unless essential elements are clearly defined. From a scientific standpoint, when we model the impact of an instrument like this, the minimum threshold must be 20%,” he stressed. The 20% threshold refers to the proportion of real-time production of vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics that manufacturers should be required to contribute to the WHO under the PABS System. A recent study indicates that an even higher allocation of 35% would be needed to achieve the objectives of the Pandemic Agreement. However, the latest draft text released by the INB Bureau introduces a critical dilution of even the benefit-sharing commitment, from 20% to 10% of real-time production during a pandemic. No minimum set-asides have been allocated for preventing outbreaks from becoming public health emergencies of international concern and during such emergencies (to prevent the emergence of a pandemic situation). Concerns of experts are echoed by a civil society letter signed by over 100 organizations from 41 countries and sent on 18 February to negotiators in the room. The letter stresses the need for concrete language on equitable access, citing examples of how historically countries most affected by a public health emergency of international concern or pandemic have failed to receive timely access to curb the spread of deadly pathogens. The letter spells out the changes they would like to see in the text regarding PABS and its definite role in securing benefit sharing and addressing inequitable access during severe health crises. However, there is great opposition from developed countries and Big Pharma. Sangeeta Shashikant, intellectual property and development programme coordinator at Third World Network, referred to repeated attempts by developed countries to undermine the effective operationalisation of the PABS system. She pointed to moves by developed countries to de-link access from benefit sharing, despite international agreement that access to biological materials as well as use of sequence information should be subject to fair and equitable benefit sharing. She said developed countries are also opposed to traceability mechanisms to identify and commit users of pathogen material and sequence information to access and benefit-sharing conditions. Timothée Poisot, Professor at the University of Montreal argued that “there is a concerning trend to twist the definition of open science and open access until it becomes about removing all mechanisms that allow for tracing how data is being used”. He clarified, “When we talk about open science, it must respect two principles: protecting researchers' contributions and ensuring that scientific advancements benefit everyone”. Negotiations will end on Friday, 21 February, and will resume in April with possible additional informal sessions until the World Health Assembly.
|
||
