World Health Organization (WHO) member countries have adopted a new treaty aimed at improving international coordination and cooperation for future pandemics. The agreement, finalized on May 20, 2025, seeks to address prevention, preparation, and response measures. However, Human Rights Watch has highlighted concerns regarding the treaty’s lack of enforcement mechanisms and funding obligations.
Matt McConnell from Human Rights Watch commented on the treaty’s significance: “With ongoing disease outbreaks and inevitable future pandemics, the treaty is a much-needed step in the right direction, but getting to yes meant kicking some important cans down the road.” He emphasized that the success of this agreement depends on government commitments.
The WHO Pandemic Agreement aims to reduce global health inequalities and mitigate human rights impacts during pandemics. Yet it does not fully address human rights violations experienced during the Covid-19 pandemic. The treaty will take effect once ratified by at least 60 governments and is open for signatures after another negotiation round next year.
The Covid-19 pandemic resulted in over 7 million deaths globally. During this period, wealthier nations were criticized for hoarding healthcare resources and prioritizing profits over equitable distribution of vaccines and therapeutics. The new treaty is an outcome of three years of negotiations intended to prevent such disparities in future pandemics.
Despite its adoption being a significant international achievement, Human Rights Watch noted that several challenges remain unresolved. These include developing an annex addressing Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing (PABS), which would facilitate sharing pathogen data with pandemic potential more equitably.
Pharmaceutical companies participating in PABS will provide WHO with 20% of their production for equitable distribution to low- and middle-income countries during a pandemic emergency. However, details about how PABS will operate are yet to be finalized.
While legally binding upon ratification, many commitments within the treaty are voluntary with notable omissions like accountability mechanisms or financial support provisions. Criticism has also been directed at PABS; The Lancet described its commitment as “shameful” due to insufficient provisions for low- and middle-income countries.
Human Rights Watch urges governments involved in further negotiations to align their efforts with domestic and international human rights obligations. They stress ensuring that businesses producing healthcare goods are adequately regulated under these frameworks.
“The agreement’s lip service to equity is largely undermined by its failures,” McConnell stated. He called for stronger commitments from Global North countries to avoid repeating past mistakes made during Covid-19 responses.
