Consensus reached on the WHO Pandemic Agreement. Now we wait until the World Health Assembly in May where it will be presented to Member States for adoption.
Introduction
After more than three years of negotiations, the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) concluded its final meeting on Tuesday 15th April 2025 in Geneva, Switzerland. The result? Consensus on a draft Pandemic Agreement (“Agreement”) that, on the surface, appears rooted in the language of “preparedness,” “equity,” and “solidarity.” However, for those willing to read between the lines, it becomes clear: this agreement is less about global health and more about institutionalising profit.
Rather than a sincere effort to protect human health, the Pandemic Agreement is a framework for ongoing surveillance, manufactured urgency, and deepening pharmaceutical dependency, all serving the same vested interests that benefitted enormously from the COVID-19 response.
It’s not about “Prevention”
“Prevention” is another term frequently cited in the Agreement, but there’s no money in prevention. The proposed mechanisms – widespread PCR testing, stockpiling of antivirals, mass vaccine production and the expanded use of ventilators – are not neutral tools. They are products. It is not about “prevention”.
Behind each of these products are powerful corporations and “philanthropic” foundations with long-standing ties to global health institutions such as the WHO. These entities have the lobbying power and financial incentive to ensure that “pandemics” remain profitable ventures.
The WHO has framed its commitment to securing twenty percent of pandemic-related health products, via the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System (PABS) (one of the most controversial elements of the Agreement, now postponed for future annexation) as a humanitarian gesture. It is not! In reality, it legitimises perpetual demand for and the global distribution of pharmaceutical goods. Safety, efficacy or need are simply not considerations.
Here is the relevant section from the Agreement:
“Article 12: Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System
(a) Each participating manufacturer shall make available to WHO, pursuant to legally binding contracts, rapid access to 20% of their real-time production of safe, quality and effective vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics for the pathogen causing the pandemic emergency. A minimum of 10% is to be donated, with the remaining percentage provided at “affordable” prices”.
“One Health” – health or surveillance?
“Article 1: Use of Terms
(b) One Health approach for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response recognizes that the health of humans is closely linked and interdependent with the health of domestic and wild animals, as well as plants and the wider environment (including ecosystems), aiming for a sustainable balance, and uses an integrated multisectoral and transdisciplinary approach to pandemic prevention preparedness and response, which contributes to sustainable development in an equitable manner.
This Article interconnects human health with the health of animals, plants, and ecosystems. It calls for a multi-sectoral, integrated approach to pandemic prevention and response.
At first glance, the “One Health” concept, embedded throughout the Agreement, sounds reasonable (as is often the case with many the narratives of the supranational institutions). In reality, it significantly broadens the scope of surveillance to include “animals, plants, and ecosystems” i.e. all living things and environments on the planet! This opens the door to a global hunt for “emerging pathogens” under the guise of protection. This requires continuous funding, and while the Pandemic Agreement itself does not grant powers to infringe on individual rights, the identification of a pathogen can trigger the use of other legislative tools, such as the International Health Regulations (IHR) or the Public Health Act in England, which governments then cite to justify lockdowns, mandates, and other restrictions. These measures are often accepted by the people under the pressure of fear and in the name of “safety”.
The One Health approach doesn’t aim to catch the next pandemic early. Instead, it fosters a climate of perpetual bio-anxiety, making people believe outbreaks are always imminent. This mindset enables governments to justify the reimplementation of the same extreme public health measures witnessed during COVID-19: lockdowns, mask mandates, vaccine coercion, and restrictions on individual freedoms.
Incentivising crises
The Agreement creates an entire economic structure around the emergence of pathogens. Genetic material becomes a tradable asset. The incentives now favour the discovery of new pathogens. Addressing the actual causes of ill health: poor nutrition, environmental toxicity, social disconnection, lack of sunlight, stress, and access to clean water are not even considered.
This Agreement institutionalises the Pandemic Industrial Complex – a system where jobs, careers, global health funding, supranational organisations rely on the constant threat of disease. When the foundations of entire industries are built upon keeping the people in a constant state of fear, the system will inevitably begin to produce the very emergencies it claims to prevent in order to justify its own existence.
It is easy to see how emergency powers, digital ID systems and top-down technocratic control mechanisms follow and are justified all under the guise of “public health.”
Health sovereignty: reclaiming self-determination
True health is not found in a lab, behind a mask or under house arrest. It comes from good nutrition, clean water, connection to nature and community, sunlight, movement, joy and purpose.
Rather than living in fear of the next virus, we the people must reclaim health sovereignty without interference from institutions that profit from our sickness.
The first sentence of the preamble to the Agreement states:
“Recognizing that States bear the primary responsibility for the health and well-being of their peoples…”
But health and wellbeing are not the responsibility of the State. Rather, they are the natural right and responsibility of the individual. Ceding that power, that authority, to the State removes agency and self-determination and ultimately leads to exploitation.
A note of UK law and international treaties
It’s important to understand that international treaties bind states not individuals.
In the UK, treaties do not automatically become part of domestic law. As a dualist legal system, international law must be explicitly adopted through legislation passed by Parliament. This means the Pandemic Agreement has no direct legal effect within the UK unless and until Parliament enacts it through domestic legislation.
Until such time, Parliamentary Sovereignty ensures that the Agreement remains binding only at the international level and not upon the people.
Next Steps
The agreed draft of the Agreement will be presented for adoption at the 78th World Health Assembly (WHA) to be held from 17th to 26th May 2025. Each country can decide whether or not to sign the Agreement. United States and Argentina have withdrawn from WHO and will not be signatories to the Agreement.
Annex A: excerpts from the Agreement that may be of interest
The entire Agreement (unofficial draft) can be read here.
Article 1 Use of terms
(b) “One Health approach” for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response recognizes that the health of humans is closely linked and interdependent with the health of domestic and wild animals, as well as plants and the wider environment (including ecosystems), aiming for a sustainable balance, and uses an integrated multisectoral and transdisciplinary approach to pandemic prevention preparedness and response, which contributes to sustainable development in an equitable manner.
(c) “pandemic emergency” means a public health emergency of international concern that is caused by a communicable disease and:
(i) has, or is at high risk of having, wide geographical spread to and within multiple States; and
(ii) is exceeding, or is at high risk of exceeding, the capacity of health systems to respond in those States; and
(iii) is causing, or is at high risk of causing, substantial social and/or economic disruption, including disruption to international traffic and trade; and
(iv) requires rapid, equitable and enhanced coordinated international action, with whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches;
(d) “pandemic-related health products” means those relevant health products that may be needed for prevention, preparedness and response to pandemic emergencies;
(There is a foot note applicable to (d) above which states: “1 Pursuant to the amended IHR (2005). The Conference of the Parties shall consider any further amendments to the IHR modifying this term, with the aim to ensure consistency in the use of terms between the IHR and this Agreement.” It is worth noting that the “relevant health products” definition in the IHR amendments includes medicines, vaccines, diagnostics, medical devices, vector control products, personal protective equipment, decontamination products, assistive products, antidotes, cell-and gene-based therapies, and other health technologies.)
(g) “public health emergency of international concern” means an extraordinary event which is determined:
(i) to constitute a public health risk to other States through the international spread of disease; and
(ii) to potentially require a coordinated international response;
Article 2 Objective
- In furtherance of this objective, the provisions of the WHO Pandemic Agreement apply both during and between pandemics, unless otherwise specified.
Article 3 Principles and approaches
To achieve the objective of the WHO Pandemic Agreement and to implement its provisions, the Parties shall be guided, inter alia, by the following:
- The sovereign right of States, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, to legislate and to implement legislation, within their jurisdiction;
- The best available science and evidence as the basis for public health decisions for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.
Article 4. Pandemic prevention and surveillance
(f) measures to strengthen effective routine immunization programs especially by increasing and/or maintaining high immunization coverage, and timely supplementary vaccination to reduce public health risks and to prevent outbreaks, promoting public awareness of the importance of immunization, and strengthening supply chains and immunization systems;
(h) surveillance, risk assessment and prevention of vector-borne diseases that may lead to pandemic emergencies, including by developing, strengthening and maintaining capacities, and by taking into account social, demographic and/or environmental factors that can impact vector distribution and disease transmission;
Article 6. Preparedness, readiness and health system resilience
(f) promoting the use of social and behavioural sciences, risk communication and community engagement for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response;
Article 12. Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System
(a) Each participating manufacturer shall make available to WHO, pursuant to legally binding contracts, rapid access to 20% of their real-time production of safe, quality and effective vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics for the pathogen causing the pandemic emergency. A minimum of 10% is to be donated, with the remaining percentage provided at “affordable” prices.
Article 14. Regulatory systems strengthening
- The Parties shall, as appropriate, monitor and strengthen rapid alert systems and take regulatory measures to respond to substandard and falsified pandemic-related health products.
Article 18. Communication and public awareness
- Each Party shall, as appropriate, take measures to strengthen science, public health and pandemic literacy in the population, as well as access to transparent, timely, accurate, science-and evidence-based information on pandemics and their causes, impacts and drivers, as well as on the efficacy and safety of pandemic related health products, particularly through risk communication and effective community-level engagement.
Article 20. Sustainable financing
- A Coordinating Financial Mechanism (the Mechanism) is hereby established to promote sustainable financing for the implementation of this Agreement to support strengthening and expanding capacities for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, and contribute to the prompt availability of surge financing response necessary as of day zero, particularly in developing country Parties, and the Coordinating Financial Mechanism established under the amended International Health Regulations (2005) shall be utilized as the Mechanism to serve the implementation of this Agreement, in a manner determined by the COP. In this regard, and for the purposes of the implementation of this Agreement:
(a) The Mechanism shall function under the authority and guidance of the Conference of the Parties and be accountable to it.
(b) The Mechanism’s operation may be supported by one or more international entities to be selected by the Conference of the Parties. The Conference of the Parties may adopt necessary working arrangements with other international entities.
(c) The Conference of the Parties shall adopt by consensus terms of reference for the Mechanism and modalities for its operationalization and governance in relation to the implementation of this Agreement, within 12 months after entry into force of the WHO Pandemic Agreement.
Article 24. Secretariat
- Nothing in the WHO Pandemic Agreement shall be interpreted as providing the WHO Secretariat, including the WHO Director-General, any authority to direct, order, alter or otherwise prescribe the national and/or domestic laws, as appropriate, or policies of any Party, or to mandate or otherwise impose any requirements that Parties take specific actions, such as ban or accept travellers, impose vaccination mandates or therapeutic or diagnostic measures or implement lockdowns.
(It doesn’t need to as our own government can do that. All the Agreement needs to do is provide the pathogens to justify the imposition, by our government, of policies that violate the rights of the people).
