Countries Choose Consensus on Pandemic Agreement, G7 Fait Accompli on Caveated Terms of Tech Transfer Compromises Policy Space for Developing Countries

Newsletter Edition #126 [Treaty Talks - The Files Flash]

Hi,

Early this morning countries agreed on the text for a new Pandemic Agreement after three years of often fractious negotiations.

In today’s story we unpack the final hours of these historic deliberations and describe how countries reached agreement in the starkly unequal field of international diplomacy. (It is unbelievable how much politics is embedded in a footnote in international negotiations!)

I am thankful for the trust and time of our numerous sources who spoke with me over the years in these diplomatically sensitive negotiations.

My utmost privilege to have been reporting on these processes, and a special shout out to my fellow reporting companion Nishant Sirohi who has been a bedrock of support for much of this period.

Thank you for your engagement, dear readers. We continue to be committed in examining interests, influences and outcomes in global health, going beyond treaty-making. It seems there is plenty to do.

---

If you find our work valuable, become a paying subscriber. Tracking global health policy-making in Geneva is tough and expensive. Help us in raising important questions, and in keeping an ear to the ground. Readers paying for our work helps us meet our costs.

Our gratitude to our subscribers who ensure we stay in the game!

---

Until later!

Priti

Feel free to write to us: patnaik.reporting@gmail.com, Follow us on X: @filesgeneva

---

Illustration Credit: Amy Clarke, Chembe Collaborative

I. PANDEMIC TREATY NEGOTIATIONS

Countries Choose Consensus on Pandemic Agreement, G7 Fait Accompli on Caveated Terms of Tech Transfer Compromises Policy Space for Developing Countries

By Priti Patnaik & Nishant Sirohi

---

WHO member states voted for multilateralism in global health in the early hours of April 16th 2025, when they reached consensus on a new Pandemic Agreement after a rough patch of negotiations on the final day, but that ultimately saw all countries on board for the newest law in global health when it comes into force.

Far from perfect, this legal instrument tries to seek a balance between the interests of 193 member states of WHO (sans United States).

Given the vast inequalities between countries, a balanced agreement however may not necessarily mean an equitable outcome. This should not be surprising, since the developed world boasts of the resources, the expertise, the industry, the institutions, and the narratives. Even so, the agreement that took three years to negotiate is emblematic of the leadership, the persistence, and the structural weaknesses of the developing world.

This vast legal text with three chapters comprising 37 articles is at 32 pages. If adopted, pending negotiations and consensus on the annex on Pathogen Access and Benefits Sharing, it is expected to be the foundation of a structured framework for Pandemic Preparedness, Prevention and Response.

In this story we recount the deliberations on April 15^th when the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body met for a final time to discuss the text and to reach consensus on the draft agreement in the small hours of April 16^th.

We describe process and politics in these negotiations that have been difficult, yet pivotal in a fractured world wounded by vindictive geopolitics deeply affecting global health governance.