TWN Info Service on Health Issues
28 March 2024
Third World Network

WHO: INB Bureau proposes another round of negotiations without “on-screen” drafting 

Geneva, 28 March (TWN) – The Bureau of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) has proposed another round of negotiations form 29 April to10 May to facilitate adoption of the pandemic instrument during the 77^th World Health Assembly (27 May to 2 June).

According to the Bureau, the negotiations will take place without any “on-screen drafting”, which compromises text-based negotiations.

Projecting proposed amendments to the negotiation text on a screen enables all participating Member States to understand the implications of the proposed amendments and to take an informed decision. The absence of on-screen drafting cripples Member States in discerning the proposed amendments and taking decisions on whether to agree to amendment proposals.

INB9 ends today (28 March) with no consensus reached yet so the proposed additional meeting will be a resumed INB9.

The Bureau circulated the following modalities for the resumed 9^th meeting of the INB (INB9) on 27 March night in a power point presentation.

Draft WHO Pandemic Agreement for INB9 resumed:

• Focused approach, without losing the essence of the mandate
• Contribute to operationalizing equity
• Based on input to date
• Drafted by Bureau, with the support of the Secretariat
• Circulated in English by 18 April 2024 and then made available in all
• official languages as soon as possible thereafter.

Intersessional period before INB9 resumed:

• Convergence text resulting from informal discussions to be provided to Bureau by 5 April
• Regional and/or group discussions to be convened by Bureau to update on progress, prior to distribution of text (week of 15 April – dates to be confirmed with the regional coordinators)
• Ambassadorial meetings – present the approach of the Bureau
• Briefing to the INB – Member States and relevant stakeholders – prior to INB9 resumed. This will be in advance of the 8^thmeeting of the Working Group on Amendment of the International Health Regulations 2005 (WGIHR) (Week of 22 April – dates to be confirmed)
• Coordination with the WGIHR Bureau on the matters they are handling.

Conduct of the INB9 resumed:

• Focus to find common ground and consensus
• No “on-screen drafting” in drafting group
• Sufficient time for informals and/or working groups, as needed (maximum of two at a time to be held in parallel)
• Bureau members may conduct informal sessions
• “Greening” of text in drafting group
• INB-related elements in the World Health Assembly resolution (for adopting the pandemic agreement) to be discussed at INB9 Resumed session
• Draft to be prepared by the Bureau and shared in advance.

Thus, the Bureau will prepare the negotiating text for the resumed session and will attempt to build consensus through an informal session. Two parallel informals will take place on the side-lines. As mentioned above there would be little scope for effective text-based negotiations in the absence of on-screen drafting.

The modality gives a hint on the orientation of the Bureau’s text for the resumed INB9. The modality states that the draft would “contribute to operationalizing equity”. This means that the provisions on equity would be largely couched in best endeavour language and focus will be on concrete legal obligations to prevent pandemics. This will unfortunately mean that developing countries would be forced to undertake legal obligations on establishing extensive surveillance infrastructure and data sharing without any corresponding legal guarantee on access to health products, benefits sharing arrangements (obligation under the Convention on Biodiversity and its Nagoya Protocol to which majority of WHO Member States are Parties) and finance to implement the pandemic instrument.

During a briefing session on 27 March with INB observers the Co-chair of the INB, Mr. Roland Driece of the Netherlands, signalled that the thinking within the Bureau is that the negotiations would now focus on concluding an instrument containing only essential elements focusing mainly on prevention elements. The Co-chair called it an instrument of essential elements.

The Co-chair stated that the Bureau feels that “we need another approach to deliver on the INB mandate”. He asked whether the delegations were with them on delivering the mandate.

All countries said that they are committed to delivering on their mandate but at the same time they told the Bureau that it will be challenging “if we follow what we were doing for now”.

The Group of Equity, while welcoming the Bureau’s suggestion to make textual suggestions, stated that they expect the Bureau to do the following:

First, place the Bureau’s textual suggestions beneath the negotiating boxes within the latest on-screen text.

Second, provide a rationale for the textual suggestions, how these are addressing the concerns or requirements of the Member States who have proposed text suggestions to each Article during the 9^th INB session.

Third, if the Bureau feels it cannot incorporate certain elements without further convergence from Parties, they should specifically mention those elements beneath the suggested texts.

Fourth, avoid repetitive words conveying the same or similar meaning to make the text more legal and operational in nature.

Fifth, consider whether each Article is operationalizing equity.

The current way forward from the Bureau apparently does not take these suggestions into account.

Regarding the operationalisation of equity, the Group for Equity, called for four elements:

1. A fund to assist the implementation of the pandemic agreement and IHR 2005, which is accountable to the WHO Member States and operates under their guidance;
2. Legally binding obligations to facilitate diversification of production of pandemic- related products, and equitable allocation;
3. Respect and consistency for other various international conventions and treaties;
4. A pathogen access and benefit sharing mechanism under Article 12, aligning with the design jointly made by 75 developing countries, involving both the Africa Group and Group for Equity.