European Parliamentarians Support An Equitable Regime For Future Pandemic Response

A more liberalised patent regime was adopted in June 2022 instead of a full-fledged TRIPS waiver that too only on vaccines with some more conditionalities attached that made it almost redundant. A quick decision to share technology would have led to mass production and helped to fast vaccinate the world, preventing avoidable deaths. Alas! It did not happen. Currently, the dominant narrative in European countries is that the pandemic is over, which is far from true. World leaders, mainly from rich countries, should learn from their mistakes and prepare for a robust regime of pandemic prevention preparedness and response (PPPR).

The meeting of a Civil Society delegation with the Members of Parliament of UK, European Union and Germany in April 2023 to seek their support for a better preparedness to face ongoing and any future pandemic was a fruitful endeavour indeed!

The delegation had two sets of demands. Support the extension of the WTO June 2022 Ministerial Decision to Covid therapeutics and diagnostics. Adopt a Pandemic Instrument at the WHO which is equitable, legally binding on parties and mandating the rich countries for benefit sharing accrued from the information they get from the low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). After due deliberation, the World Health Organisation has put forward a zero draft of the Pandemic Instrument which aims to deal with any future pandemic in a holistic way. This was discussed in the recently concluded World Health Assembly.

Some glaring facts of inequality and discrimination in vaccination, test and treatment were presented before the MPs. As the rate of vaccination stands by June 14, 2023, 3 in 4 people in high-income countries have received at least one done, whereas in low-income countries it is 1 in 3. Only 37.2 per cent of Africa have been vaccinated with a single dose to date. In Asia, the vaccination rate has improved but the damage has already been done.

An RT-PCR test costs $55 (4500 rupees) in the Philippines and $11 USD (900 rupees) in Yemen. Due to the high cost of testing and treatment, the countries in the global south suffer, with the most marginalised communities suffering the most. In the areas where less testing has been done, the unofficial rate of deaths due to Covid is more. Where the official figures for death stand at 6.9 million, the unofficial figures are approximately around 21.8 million, which is 3.2 times the official figure, finds The Economist.
Low cost of test and treatment is necessary for countries which are less vaccinated. Some of the least vaccinated (both doses) countries are Burundi at 0.3%, Congo at 11%, Haiti 2.1% and Yemen 2.6%.

MPs’ responses

We met Preet Kaur Gill, the opposition Labour MP and shadow Minister on International Development, who had earlier in the week outlined how Labour’s approach to development and pandemic preparedness aims to move away from the failing charity model, instead of being driven by solidarity and long-term development planning. Labour supports the principles of a legally binding WHO treaty that sets standards for all countries to contribute to global health security.

In order to be as good as their word, Labour will need to be bold in taking on the monopoly power of big pharma companies. With the UK’s large pharmaceutical sector and substantial public investment in medicines development, a determined government could do a lot to build a more democratic pharma system, for instance by mandating technology transfer and putting strong access conditions on publicly-funded research. She tweeted appreciating the meeting with the CSO delegation.

The delegation met Virendra Sharma, Labour MP and member of the International Development Committee and Chair of committees on Nepal and India, who chaired a debate in the UK Parliament on April 17 on the International Treaty on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response. We shared our concern that rich countries would repeat the same short-sighted and nationalist approaches seen during Covid-19 if the WHO’s Pandemic instrument is not binding. On 27 May 2022, the UK government stated that it supported a new legally-binding instrument “as part of a cooperative and comprehensive approach to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”
Tilly Metz, the Member of European Parliament (MEP) from the Greens/European Free Alliance group was shocked to hear the correlation between the lack of testing to the high unofficial death figures. She supports the cause for extending the TRIPS decision to Covid test and treatment and an equitable Pandemic instrument, saying, “This is such a serious issue which the EU Parliament needs to discuss.” And tweeted reiterating her stand.

The CSO delegation exchanged views with the officials of the European Commission (EC).

The EC said it has a comprehensive approach to the matter. It is of the view that the TRIPS waiver of vaccines would actually block the sharing of the technology. On the other hand, it pushed for a ‘more pragmatic mechanism’ of a liberal patent regime. Thus, the countries can invoke compulsory licensing when needed. On extending the TRIPS decision to Covid test and treatment, it is studying the issue, consulting and waiting for the results of the US investigation on the necessity of a waiver. It also believes in “incentivising the companies” for innovation. On The Pandemic Instrument, the EC took pride that it was they who proposed to have such an instrument.

Irrespective of the stand of the EC, the fact of the matter is that the companies like Pfizer, Moderna and BioNTech have made windfall profits by selling Covid vaccines and medicines. It’s true that the TRIPS waiver by itself would not lead to the sharing of science and technology, but will create a hassle-free environment for the sharing of the same by removing the legal barriers. And the governments of the US and Germany can ask Moderna, BioNTech and Pfizer respectively to share technology with the global south as there has been a lot of taxpayer’s money invested to develop the vaccines and medicines. This might lead to a path of mass production and address inequality.
On the Pandemic instrument, the EU actually has played around and put forward its own proposal instead of deliberating on the zero draft. It is understood to be a delaying tactic by the EU.

The stand of the EU on TRIPS waiver depends on its members, mainly Germany and some other countries. Given spiralling poverty in the global south owing to the pandemic, Working Group on Global Health of the ruling SPD (Socialist Democratic Party) Parliamentary Group, of which Tina Rudolph is a member, has a clear position on the subject and supports a coordinated global prevention and preparation for future pandemics.

Way forward

The Pandemic accord was discussed in the recently concluded World Health Assembly in May in Geneva on how to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.

To prove their sincerity and address the mistrust of the LMICs in them, the UK, EU, Germany and other rich countries including the US should immediately support the TRIPS decision proposal of Covid test and treatment. They ought to support amendment proposals to ensure equity and common but differential responsibilities in the Pandemic instrument. They are expected to propose or support a. to ensure public financing for biomedical research & development, b. putting public interest conditions on government-funded R&D, c. mandating technology transfer to LMICs, d. sharing relevant intellectual property and making commitments to suspend intellectual property in the event of another pandemic and d. ensuring greater transparency on all aspects of innovation and access to countermeasures.

(Baisakh is associated with Global Call to Action Against Poverty and the People’s Vaccine Alliance. This article has been written with additional inputs from Tim Bierley, Global Justice Now, Piotr Kolczynski, Oxfam Brussels, Leonie Petersen, Oxfam Germany)