Just a few years ago, our lives were turned upside down by the COVID-19 pandemic. The global chaos and massive damage caused highlighted the need for a more effective response to future pandemics. To prevent such disasters in the future, a global pandemic treaty is now being developed. André den Exter, Associate Professor of Health Law at Erasmus School of Law, spoke about this topic in a broadcast of RTL Nieuws.
The aim of the pandemic treaty is to prevent future pandemics and, should there be another virus outbreak, to ensure better distribution of vaccines and protectants among countries. It also considers making the recipe for those vaccines publicly available so that all countries have the option of producing them. However, this plan has been getting resistance from some countries. The UK, for instance, has already indicated that it does not want to sign, as it would have to give away too many of its own vaccines.
A fair distribution
According to Den Exter, the idea behind the treaty was to enable better pandemic control. "We saw with the COVID-19 pandemic that every country was working for itself, which did not keep the pandemic out", Den Exter said. "In particular, the unequal distribution of vaccines for low-income countries was a big problem. This treaty tries to ensure a fairer distribution."
For instance, the treaty would provide that two times ten per cent of vaccine production would be set aside for redistribution, especially for developing countries that do not have the capacity to produce their own vaccines. However, not all member states want to cooperate. Nevertheless, Den Exter sees it as an important win. "If one country does not participate, that is not necessarily a problem. It is about fair distribution, but there is of course more to that treaty."
Criticism and optimism
However, there is also criticism that the treaty's agreements are too watered down and, therefore, may not have much effect. Den Exter remains optimistic: "Initially, it is a unique treaty. Member states intend to achieve better distribution. How this is to be realised is a matter of implementation, but the fact that fair distribution is being discussed is already a step forward."
A key question is whether countries will actually comply with agreements during a new pandemic. "That is why you have to fix everything in advance", says Den Exter. "It is as much about signalling and quicker exchange of data as it is about sharing technology and knowledge. Low-wage countries also get expertise to make their own vaccines. Even if the UK does not participate, the treaty arranges for the exchange of knowledge to continue. That is crucial for developing countries' self-sufficiency."
Lack of consensus
How might the lack of consensus affect the global response to future pandemics? Den Exter acknowledges that not all 194 member states will ratify the treaty, but stresses that participation by the main vaccine producers would already be a big step forward. "The intended reallocation of vaccines is separate from the sharing of knowledge and expertise so that low-wage countries can still produce vaccines themselves."
On the actual capacity of the treaty to tackle future pandemics more effectively, Den Exter states that the support of key players such as the US and the EU is essential. "They can contribute to a more effective distribution of vaccines. The treaty also strengthens the monitoring function and technical support of member states, enabling faster and coordinated action."
Role of the World Health Organisation
The World Health Organisation plays a crucial role in enforcing the treaty's commitments. "The World Health Organisation has limited enforcement tools and mainly works on the basis of coordination and consensus", Den Exter explains. "Non-compliance has to be addressed through diplomatic consultations. Heavier enforcement tools are not available, but this was the maximum feasible effort to get all states on board."
The pandemic treaty could change the dynamics of the global pharmaceutical industry, especially with regard to vaccine patents and technology transfer. "The treaty makes it easier for states to invoke TRIPS exclusions, giving low-wage countries earlier access to patented vaccines", says Den Exter. "States also commit to sharing knowledge and expertise. This does not need to be free of charge; reasonable fees or licences can also be advantageous for pharma companies."
Alternative measures
Should the pandemic treaty fail to materialise or prove ineffective, alternative measures are possible. Den Exter stresses that the treaty is unique and based on globally shared principles and implementing measures. "Additional measures, such as criteria for reallocation, can be achieved through additional protocols. The COVID-19 pandemic made it clear that an 'every man for himself' approach is ineffective and more costly than a global approach."
- Associate professor
