TWN Info Service on Health Issues (Sep25/03)
17 September 2026
Third World Network

WHO PABS: Developing Countries Rally Behind Equal Footing, Contracts and Federated Model

Geneva, 16 September (Rajnia de Vito) – The 8th session of the Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG) negotiating the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) Annex to the World Health Organization (WHO)’s Pandemic Agreement heard a consistent message from developing countries in their opening statements: Article 12 has already been negotiated and agreed, the task before the IGWG is to operationalize it, not reopen or rebalance it.

But before Co-Chair Ambassador Tovar da Silva Nunes (Brazil) gave the floor to Member States for general statements on 14 September, Namibia intervened on the programme of work, proposing that the meeting begin with the fundamental question of the PABS System’s architecture. Following the order of the on-screen text, which begins with PABS System access modalities (who may access, under what terms, through which instruments and with what traceability) would risk discussing these questions in the abstract, Namibia argued. Instead, it suggested using the federated model proposed by the Africa Group during the previous IGWG session as the starting premise for the discussions.

In support of this approach, Namibia referred to the European Genomic Data Infrastructure (GDI) as evidence that access and traceability can coexist within a federated architecture. The initiative brings together “70 institutes across 24 European countries” and uses a model in which “data remain at national nodes, while aggregated and non-sensitive information is openly discoverable through a federated query system and access is controlled for approved users in the public and private sectors”. Namibia argued that this demonstrates that open access and traceability do not need to be competing objectives but can operate as separate layers of the same system.

Starting from the federated model, drawing on this existing European infrastructure, Namibia suggested, could allow delegations to move more quickly into the substantive design of Section 2 on implementation and avoid repeatedly revisiting the same conceptual questions during textual negotiations. As Namibia put it, the proposal was not to “build something new,” but to begin “from what already exists” and use that premise to make concrete progress on a global PABS federated model.

Opening Statements

Algeria, speaking on behalf of the 47 Member States of the Africa Group as well as Egypt, Somalia and Sudan, reaffirmed the Group’s support for an equitable, effective and operational PABS System in which access and benefit-sharing remain inseparable and operate on an equal footing.

The Group argued that this balance does not need to be renegotiated or invented by the IGWG because it is already established in Article 12 of the Pandemic Agreement, and established by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit sharing. “Our mandate is therefore not to rebalance Article 12, but to give it operational effect in full,” Algeria said.

According to the Africa Group, this requires six elements already established by the Agreement: rapid and timely access, monetary and non-monetary benefit-sharing on an equal footing, recognition of States’ sovereign rights over their biological resources, legal certainty for providers, researchers and manufacturers, traceability to ensure accountability and transparency, and simultaneity, so that all elements of the PABS System come into operation together rather than one preceding the others.

The Group also stressed that the system must be consistent with the objectives of the CBD and its Nagoya Protocol, while its governance should remain transparent, inclusive and balanced, with fundamental decisions under the authority of the Parties.

It is against this legal and operational framework, Algeria explained, that the Africa Group has proposed the federated model as the architecture for the PABS System as a whole: “sovereign national nodes, common rules for all, a shared index, access on agreed terms, and obligations that travel with the material and the information. [...] Federated systems are today the operating choice of several public genomic and health data infrastructures. What we propose is therefore not a regional approach, but a common solution applicable to all parties on the same terms in which international cooperation strengthens the sovereign rights of states”.

Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMRO), stressed that for countries facing overlapping emergencies, fragile health systems and dependence on external supply chains, “equity and fairness in the PABS System are not abstract concepts.”

For the PABS System to operationalize that, the group rejected the notion of needing access to be mandatory while benefit-sharing remains voluntary. “A system in which access is assured, immediate, and predictable, while benefit-sharing is detached, deferred, or discretionary cannot constitute equal footing”.

Pakistan also reiterated the need for legal certainty through legally binding contracts and for the PABS System to consider a long-term approach as well, by strengthening regional and local manufacturing through technology transfer, licensing and capacity development.

It addressed arguments that manufacturers would ultimately obtain access to pathogens and sequence information regardless of how the PABS System is designed, stating that, “We do not believe this can be the basis of a multilateral system”.

“The fact that information or materials may ultimately become available somewhere is not the same as having timely, lawful, transparent and traceable access under an agreed international framework,” Pakistan said. It expressed concern that “if access is treated as inevitable while benefit-sharing remains optional, the very incentive for countries to share rapidly and confidently through the PABS System is weakened.”

Pakistan also challenged the argument that governments cannot compel manufacturers to undertake benefit-sharing obligations because they are independent commercial entities. States, Pakistan noted, “routinely shape commercial conduct through legislation, regulation, procurement, public financing, market access, and contractual agreements.” It therefore argued that “the question is not whether governments have the means to influence commercial conduct, but whether there is sufficient political will”.

Guyana, speaking on behalf of the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica and Guyana, reiterated that equity is a “fundamental requirement” of the system, particularly given the longstanding imbalance whereby benefits arising from pathogen sharing “have not always reached all countries in a timely, predictable, and equitable manner.”

The Annex, Guyana continued, must translate this principle into “clear, binding and implementable provisions.” In particular, “benefit-sharing should be predictable, timely and effective during a pandemic without relying on ad hoc negotiations at a moment when certainty and solidarity are most needed.” This can only be achieved through standardized PABS contracts as “the legal foundation for the system,” establishing “transparent, enforceable, and consistent obligations throughout the PABS chain.” Such contracts should ensure that the use of PABS materials and sequence information generates meaningful benefits “for all countries, regardless of size or economic capacity.”

Indonesia, speaking on behalf of the Group for Equity, reiterated the point of operationalizing the principles and elements as adopted in Article 12, the principle of equal footing between access and benefit-sharing, instead of reopening them. “Obligations on both sides carrying comparable weight and coming into operation together,” it said.

Indonesia also refused the argument used by developed countries that this would establish a transactional approach. "There is nothing unusual about wanting to know what each side has committed to, and that is what makes the system fair and workable for all of us”.

The Group further called for legal clarity, accountability, transparency and traceability, stating that “Confidence in the system depends on it". And for that, they required contracts to be streamlined and presented alongside the Annex for adoption.

Indonesia emphasized the need to think about benefit-sharing not only as set-asides but also as licenses that would strengthen countries’ ability “to make more of what we need ourselves, with the technology and skills that go with it, so that each health emergency finds us less dependent on others than the last”.

While Indonesia acknowledged the pressure on delegations to conclude the negotiations, it also noted that “multilateralism holds its value when what comes out of it makes a real difference to the people it is meant to serve”.

Nepal, speaking on behalf of the South-East Asia Region, said that despite the different proposals now before the IGWG, one question should guide the negotiations: “Whether and how do these proposals give practical effect to the legal provisions contained in Article 12 of the Agreement?”.

Nepal reiterated the fundamental link between access on one side and benefit-sharing on the other as established by Article 12, which should be at the centre of the system. If States are expected to rapidly and in a timely manner share PABS materials and sequence information, their contribution must be matched by “meaningful, equitable and predictable benefit-sharing, formally anchored in legal certainty. [...] Whatever form the system ultimately takes, benefit-sharing cannot be left to voluntary arrangements or to the goodwill of the users of the system.”

Instead, the system “must be underpinned by clear, predictable and legally defined obligations.” To operationalize these obligations, Nepal argued for “clear, predictable and legally binding contractual arrangements, consistent with the Annex and Article 12.”

Nepal also stressed that benefit-sharing cannot end with access to vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics during emergencies. It must encompass technology transfer and sustainable laboratory and manufacturing capabilities that strengthen preparedness between emergencies.

In its national capacity statement, Namibia aligned itself with the Africa Group and Group for Equity and reiterated its defense of the federated model: “The federated model answers Article 12 in its entirety.” According to Namibia, the model accommodates the core elements already agreed under Article 12: “Sovereign rights, rapid access, rapid benefit-sharing on an equal footing, legal certainty, traceability, and the simultaneous entry into operation of all elements of the system.”

It framed this position through its own experience as a provider country with national ABS legislation already in force. “For us, sovereignty over our biological resources is not a negotiating position. It is the basis of our law [...] Benefit-sharing is the condition of access, not a courtesy that may follow.”

For Namibia, this can only be achieved through traceability mechanisms that ensure the contributions of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and the value they generate remain visible and can be linked to corresponding benefit-sharing obligations. “Without traceability, the contribution disappears, and the obligation with it.”

The calls from developing countries for legally binding contracts also received support from Co-Chair Ambassador Tovar. Responding to the South-East Asia Region’s intervention, Tovar highlighted the importance of the legally binding contracts and their role in operationalizing the principles being raised by delegations. “Through the contracts we can provide both equity, equal footing and the predictability in legal terms,” he said, while allowing flexibility according to what is expected from different actors rather than imposing a “one-size-fits-all solution.”

Tovar further stressed that participation in the PABS System should come with “certainty and predictability on the benefits that are arising from the sharing or utilization of the materials and the sequence information.”