Explore the website

Subscribe to our newsletter and never miss a post!

* indicates required

Medicines Law & Policy will use the information you provide to keep you up-to-date when we post new research and insight. You can change your mind about receiving our newsletter any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in the footer of any email you receive from us. We will treat your information with respect. By clicking below, you agree that we may process your information in accordance with these terms.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.

Explore the website

Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

World Health Assembly adopts the Pandemic Agreement

“I see no objection, the resolution is adopted,” said Teodoro J. Herbosa, Secretary of Health of the Philippines and President of the 78th World Health Assembly, on Tuesday morning of 20 May. Country delegates welcomed the adoption of the Pandemic Agreement with a round of applause. The agreement, while less ambitious than hoped for at the beginning of the negotiations, still marks an important win for public health and multilateralism after 3 years of talks. The adoption of the Agreement by the WHA is an important milestone, but there is still more work to be done before the ratification process can commence.

“The WHO Pandemic Agreement involved difficult negotiations,” said Thiru Balasubramaniam of Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) in a constituency statement representing KEI, Stichting Health Action International, Oxfam, World Blind Union, and World Council of Churches. 

“Several countries sought to limit technology transfer to voluntary measures, including states that in their own laws and regulations provide a path for mandatory measures. Voluntary agreements are important, but when not available or adequate, WHO member states need legal and policy space to regulate or use other measures of a mandatory nature.”

Medicines Law & Policy had focused much of its work on the pandemic agreement on the need for strong language ensuring technology, intellectual property and know-how transfer, covered by Article 11. Timely and equitable access to pandemic countermeasures is essential to save lives in the case of future pandemics; as has often been stated, during an infectious disease outbreak, no one is safe until everyone is safe.

The passage of the agreement faced a brief last-minute hiccup on Monday night, when Slovakia insisted on calling for a vote in one of the World Health Assembly (WHA) Technical Committees about whether or not to pass the resolution onto the WHA plenary for adoption, and some other member states (such as Bulgaria and Israel) raised concerns in statements about the agreement. What followed, however, was a clear outpouring of support, with 124 member states voting in favour of the agreement. While 11 members (Bulgaria, Egypt, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, the Netherlands, Paraguay, Poland, Russia and Slovakia) abstained from voting, there were no objections. The resolution passed to the plenary, which then adopted it on Tuesday morning.

A video of the discussion can be found here. Look for Committee A, 19/05/2025 – 18:15 – 21:40 to see the vote in the technical committee; and for the Third Plenary meeting, 20/05/2025 9:35-12:50 to see it pass the plenary. Now, an intergovernmental working group will commence to finalise parts of the annex to the agreement, notably on the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing System (PABS), which is meant to be completed by the World Health Assembly in 2026. When the annex is adopted, the ratification process can start. The Agreement requires 60 signatures for it to go into force. (see illustration for next steps).

Avatar photo
+ posts

Kaitlin Mara, MSc, has been writing about international intellectual property and innovation policy for a over 15 years.

Newsletter

Never miss a post! Sign up for ML&P's newsletter.

Recent Articles

The People vs. AbbVie

Today, 9 May 2025, is an important day in court for the Dutch Pharmaceutical Accountability Foundation (PAF). In February 2023, PAF started a court...

The Pandemic Agreement is here

In December 2021, the member states of the World Health Organization decided “to draft and negotiate a WHO convention, agreement or other international instrument...

Expanding local production is essential for pandemic preparedness. It requires, however, transfer of technology.

Madam co-chairs, delegates,  This very week, from 7 to 9 April the 3rd World Local Production Forum is taking place in Abu Dhabi. Actions towards...

Will Europe block the Pandemic Agreement because of one word?

This commentary originally appeared in the Brussels Times, and is available here. The Pandemic Agreement negotiations began in December of 2021. Sufficiently motivated by the...

“Mutually agreed terms and conditions,” says it all.

On 4 March, Politico reported that the Polish presidency of the Council of the European Union (EU) is expressing doubt that the Pandemic Agreement...

Related Articles