On Wednesday, 4 February 2026, Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) delivered this constituency statement on behalf of KEI, Health Action International, Global Health Council, World Council of Churches, and Oxfam International: WHO’s work in health emergencies. The our joint statement focused on the ongoing WHO negotiations on Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing system (PABS).
Agenda item 16: WHO’s work in health emergencies
4 February 2026
Supporting organizations
Knowledge Ecology International
Health Action International
Global Health Council
World Council of Churches
Oxfam International
Completion of the Pandemic Agreement is one of the most pressing and consequential issues before the WHO, both institution and mission-wise. Negotiators are divided over the critical Annex on the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing system (PABS). In its present form, the Annex text would link the equity provisions to obligations specified in contracts between users of pathogen data, research institutions, companies, and the WHO. Some countries have opposed registration to obtain PABS data, and even refused to acknowledge the role of registration in obtaining similar data from other databases
There is a great concern that the increasing number of bilateral agreements between countries will undermine WHO’s role in facilitating the implementation of the PABS agreement.
The approach taken in the 2023 Agreement on Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction, known as the BBNJ Agreement [1], could be considered. This binding treaty facilitates open science and focuses equity provisions on product commercialisation, with enforcement by the parties to the treaty.
The negotiators have also decided to impose more secrecy on the negotiations. In some sessions, NGOs are not allowed in the building. In the last session, only relevant stakeholders and NGOs in official relations were allowed to speak briefly on the last day, remotely, and were not allowed to discuss specific sections of the text.
The secrecy surrounding these negotiations is appalling and provides ammunition to parties seeking to discredit the agreement and the WHO. WHO member states should be more transparent, not less.
1. Agreement on Marine Biological Diversity of Areas allowed to speak only briefly, remotely, and were not permittedbeyond National Jurisdiction, BBNJ Agreement, https://www.un.org/bbnjagreement/en