Un nouveau traité international de l’OMS sur la préparation et la riposte aux pandémies : pourra-t-il répondre aux besoins des pays du Sud ?
Par Dr. Germán Velásquez et Nirmalya Syam
Dans un récent communiqué signé par 25 chefs de gouvernement et le Directeur général de l’OMS, ceux-ci ont appelé à la négociation d’un traité sur les pandémies afin de permettre aux pays du monde entier de renforcer les capacités et la résilience des pays aux niveaux national, régional et mondial face aux futures pandémies. La pandémie de COVID-19 a démontré la fragilité des mécanismes dont dispose l’OMS pour se préparer et réagir aux pandémies. L’utilisation d’instruments contraignants pour promouvoir et protéger la santé dans le contexte des pandémies est nécessaire. Si les États Membres de l’OMS décident que le recours à un traité international de préparation et de riposte aux pandémies est la voie à suivre, il serait important de clarifier dès le départ les éléments et les domaines qui feront l’objet de négociations. La première étape devrait consister à identifier les aspects de la préparation et de la réponse aux pandémies dont la crise actuelle a révélé les inefficacités, et à déterminer comment s’appuyer sur les instruments existants, notamment le Règlement sanitaire international (RSI). Ce document examine certaines des questions essentielles qui devraient être abordées dans un tel traité si les négociations sont lancées, en tenant compte des besoins des pays à niveaux de développement différents et des capacités disparates pour mettre en œuvre les obligations découlant du traité.
Un nuevo tratado internacional de preparación y respuesta ante pandemias: ¿Podrá atender a las necesidades del Sur Global?
Por Germán Velásquez y Nirmalya Syam
Un reciente comunicado conjunto de 25 Jefes de Gobierno y el Director General de la OMS han pedido que se negocie un tratado sobre pandemias que permita a los países de todo el mundo reforzar las capacidades y resiliencia nacionales, regionales y mundiales ante futuras pandemias. La pandemia del COVID-19 ha demostrado la fragilidad de los mecanismos a disposición de la OMS para la preparación y la respuesta a las pandemias. Es necesario utilizar instrumentos vinculantes para promover y proteger la salud en el contexto de las pandemias. Si los Estados miembros de la OMS deciden que el camino a seguir es un tratado internacional para la preparación y respuesta a las pandemias, sería importante tener claro desde el principio los elementos y áreas que serán objeto de negociación. El primer paso debe ser identificar los aspectos de la preparación y la respuesta ante una pandemia que la crisis actual ha puesto de manifiesto que no funcionan, y cómo aprovechar los instrumentos existentes, especialmente el Reglamento Sanitario Internacional (RSI). Este documento analiza algunas de las principales cuestiones que deberían abordarse en un tratado de este tipo si se inicia la negociación, teniendo en cuenta las necesidades de países que están en diferentes niveles de desarrollo y con capacidades dispares para aplicar las obligaciones del tratado.
Investment Policy Options for Facing COVID-19 Related ISDS Claims
By Daniel Uribe and Danish
Developing and least developed countries have undertaken a number of measures to fight against the multidimensional impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Such measures and those that may be adopted in the context of the recovery efforts are, however, susceptible to challenges by foreign investors using investor-State dispute settlement mechanisms.
This policy brief first considers the kinds of measures States have adopted to limit the spread of COVID-19, protect their strategic sectors and promote economic recovery, including through foreign investment aftercare and retention. It then addresses how the investor-State dispute settlement system (ISDS) has been used by investors in times of crises, based on the analysis of the awards in several cases brought against both developed and developing countries.
Against this backdrop, the brief elaborates on the different options and initiatives States can take for preventing ISDS claims at the national, bilateral, regional and multilateral levels. It concludes with some policy advice for developing and least developed countries to face possible COVID-19 related ISDS claims in the future.
Systemic reform of the international debt architecture is yet to start
By Yuefen Li
The COVID-19 pandemic has pushed the reform of the international debt architecture to the policy agenda. Up to now policy measures to address the crushing debt burden of developing countries have focused on boosting time bound liquidity provision, which is insufficient in amount and restrictive in scope as debt-ridden and pandemic struck middle-income countries have not been covered. Even the implementation of these policy measures has been hindered by existing systemic problems. The reform of the debt architecture is yet to start. However, complacency seems to emerge. The risk of “wasting” the crisis should be avoided.
Repensando la fabricación mundial y local de productos médicos tras el COVID-19
Por Germán Velásquez
La crisis sanitaria mundial sin precedentes provocada por la pandemia del coronavirus –COVID-19, durante el primer semestre de 2020, hace que se vuelva a plantear con especial urgencia el debate sobre la producción farmacéutica local. La crisis de COVID-19 puso de manifiesto la interdependencia en la producción mundial de medicamentos, ningún país es autosuficiente. Muchos países industrializados están tomando la decisión de repatriar o desarrollar la producción de Ingredientes Farmacéuticos Activos (API). Muchos gobiernos están empezando a hablar de soberanía farmacéutica y/o seguridad sanitaria. Si esto se hace realidad, los países en desarrollo tendrán que desarrollar y/o fortalecer la producción local de medicamentos y vacunas. La guerra para obtener la futura vacuna para COVID-19 no parece fácil con estos nuevos desarrollos.
SOUTH CENTRE STATEMENT FOR NAM HEALTH MINISTERS MEETING AT THE 74TH WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY
A new pandemic treaty, if negotiated, should contribute to establish a stronger international health framework, suitable to countries with different levels of development, and equip WHO with the appropriate enforcement mechanisms and tools. Read the South Centre statement.
Emerging Trends in FTAs and Public Health: Investment Agreements and Intellectual Property
Friday, 28 May 2021 – 16:00-17:30 (CET)
The inclusion of TRIPS-Plus provisions in developing country IP laws, as a result of negotiations of free trade agreements (FTAs) continues to be of concern. In addition, there are various emerging areas that require attention from developing countries, where accumulated knowledge and institutional learning are more limited. These include investment agreements that include ‘intellectual property’ as a category of investment – with subsequent ISDS mechanisms, as well as competition and investment chapters or agreements that may restrict the policy space, such as the China-EU Comprehensive Investment Agreement. There are several important developments to consider for the upcoming years. New negotiations in the period of Covid-19 crisis, when countries are in dire financial situations, may lead to even more unbalanced negotiations. The UK is pursuing new agreements after Brexit with developing countries, while the USA has signaled renewed attention to multilateralism and at the same time is continuing to make use of Section 301 of its trade law to advance reforms in third countries. The AfCFTA negotiations of the intellectual property chapter are set to start this year. Moreover, the RCEP Agreement is to be implemented via national law amendments and attention must be given in particular to the process for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and the technical assistance offered.
In this context, the South Centre is holding a series of webinars on emerging trends related to free trade agreements (FTAs) and investment agreements that impact public health. In this first session, we will discuss the topic of investment agreements and intellectual property, including varied angles to the issue, such as perspectives for post Covid-19 agreements, the legal construction of IP as a category of investment, the challenges of ISDS and policy reform options, and the analysis of a concrete case.
SOUTH CENTRE STATEMENT FOR THE 74TH WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY: Agenda Item 13.5. Antimicrobial Resistance
Antimicrobial resistance is a silent pandemic. Today WHA74 will discuss current progress but we need to learn from COVID-19. We need to build robust health systems and fix the broken system of innovation to deliver antimicrobials as global common goods. See our statement.
South Centre General Statement to the Seventy-fourth World Health Assembly
Various interrelated processes, including a possible new pandemic treaty, are at play in addressing the current and future pandemics. Read the South Centre statement to the 74th World Health Assembly.
The Proposed Pandemic Treaty and the Challenge of the South for a Robust Diplomacy
By Obijiofor Aginam
The motivation for a pandemic treaty is infallible because of the ‘globalization of public health’ in a rapidly evolving interdependence of nations, societies, and peoples. Notwithstanding the lofty purposes of the proposed pandemic treaty as a tool for effective cooperation by member-states of the WHO to address emerging and re-emerging disease pandemics in an inter-dependent world, the proposal nonetheless raises some structural and procedural conundrums for the Global South. The negotiation of a pandemic treaty should, as a matter of necessity, take into account the asymmetries of World Health Organization member-states and the interests of the Global South.
A New WHO International Treaty on Pandemic Preparedness and Response: Can It Address the Needs of the Global South?
By Dr. Germán Velásquez and Nirmalya Syam
A recent joint communiqué by 25 Heads of Government and the WHO Director-General have called for the negotiation of a pandemic treaty to enable countries around the world to strengthen national, regional and global capacities and resilience to future pandemics. The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the fragility of the mechanisms at the disposal of WHO for preparedness and response to pandemics. The use of binding instruments to promote and protect health in the context of pandemics is needed. If WHO Member States decide that an international treaty to prepare and respond to pandemics is the way forward, it would be important to have clarity from the outset on the elements and areas that will be the subject of negotiation. The first step should be to identify the aspects of pandemic preparedness and response that the current crisis has revealed are not working, and how to build up on the existing instruments, notably the International Health Regulations (IHR). This paper discusses some of the critical issues that should be addressed in such a treaty if negotiations are launched, in view of the needs of countries at different levels of development and with disparate capacities to implement treaty obligations.
Spain’s submission at the EU’s Porto Social Summit
Spain’s submission at the European Union’s Porto Social Summit proposing to adapt global rules on intellectual property, in particular the flexibilities in the Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), to fight global pandemics is welcome.
