African Leaders Warn Against ‘Weak’ WHO Pandemic Deal, Demand Binding Equity Before Signing
By Irene
African civil society leaders have issued a strong warning to governments across the continent, urging them not to sign the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) Annex under the World Health Organization Pandemic Agreement unless it guarantees legally binding and enforceable benefit-sharing.
Speaking at a high-level press conference in Nairobi, just days before critical negotiations resume in Geneva, key health advocates said Africa risks locking itself into a system that entrenches the very inequities exposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The leaders, including Aggrey Aluso of the Resilience Action Network Africa, Dr. Samuel Kinyanjui of AIDS Healthcare Foundation Kenya, Dan Owala of the People’s Health Movement Kenya, and Willis Omondi of Mind To Heart Community-Based Organisation, called on African governments to adopt a firmer negotiating stance ahead of the resumed Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG6) meeting scheduled for April 27.
They argued that Africa, despite being a major source of pathogen samples and genetic sequencing data, continues to receive disproportionately low benefits from global health innovations. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the continent—home to 17% of the world’s population—received less than 3% of vaccines, even as its scientists contributed critical data used to develop them.
“This is not about charity—it is about fairness and strategic global health equity,” the leaders emphasized, noting that diseases with pandemic potential such as Ebola, Marburg, and mpox are largely endemic in Africa, yet vaccines and treatments remain concentrated in wealthier nations.
The PABS Annex, a key component of the Pandemic Agreement adopted in 2025, will determine how countries share pathogen samples and how resulting benefits—such as vaccines, diagnostics, and therapeutics—are distributed. Without agreement on the Annex, the broader treaty cannot be opened for signature.
Negotiations have so far stalled, with deep divisions between high-income countries, particularly in Europe, and low- and middle-income nations. While over 100 developing countries are pushing for mandatory benefit-sharing, wealthier nations favor voluntary commitments, raising fears of a repeat of past inequalities.
African representatives rejected a draft proposal in March, citing lack of consultation and weak provisions on equity. Talks are set to resume in Geneva, where Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has acknowledged that disagreements strike at the core of issues such as access, sovereignty, and global solidarity.
Civil society leaders are now demanding clear safeguards, including mandatory allocation of vaccines and treatments, enforceable contracts with manufacturers, technology transfer, and financial contributions. They also warned against proposals for a “dual-track” system that would allow unrestricted access to pathogen data without obligations—calling it a loophole that could undermine the entire framework.
At the national level, Kenya’s efforts to strengthen local pharmaceutical manufacturing and regulatory capacity were highlighted as a positive step. However, stakeholders cautioned that such progress could be undermined if global agreements fail to guarantee fair access to essential health tools.
“The last pandemic was not a failure of science, but a failure of solidarity,” said Owala. “If we accept weak provisions now, we risk rebuilding the same broken system.”
As the countdown to the World Health Assembly begins, pressure is mounting on both African governments and European negotiators to reach a fair and binding agreement. Advocates insist that anything less than enforceable equity provisions would not only fail Africa—but could shape global health injustice for decades to come.
“A bad agreement is worse than no agreement,” Aluso warned. “It would legitimize inequality for a generation.”
