A Legal Analysis of the WHO Pandemic Agreement : Content, Significance, and Limitations

At its Seventy-eighth session in 2025, the World Health Assembly adopted the WHO Pandemic Agreement under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution. The Agreement was developed against the backdrop of deficiencies in the existing international health law regime and the inequities revealed during the COVID-19 pandemic. It establishes equity and solidarity as core principles throughout all stages of pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, and seeks to institutionalize them through specific mechanisms. The adoption of the Agreement represents an important step toward institutionalizing multilateral health governance on a legal basis. This study analyzes the Agreement from an international legal perspective and aims to evaluate its normative significance and limitations. It focuses on the structure and 35 articles of the Agreement, examines the legal nature and operational functions of each institutional arrangement, and clarifies its complementary and developmental relationship with the International Health Regulations (2005). Particular attention is given to the One Health approach, strengthening health systems and workforce capacities, frameworks for research and development and technology transfer, the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) system, global supply chains and procurement mechanisms, and the establishment and authority of the Conference of the Parties. The study critically assesses the potential for institutionalizing equity and solidarity, identifies structural constraints affecting feasibility and effectiveness, and reviews principles and obligations proposed during negotiations but ultimately excluded or diluted in the final text—such as common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) and mandatory financial contributions. The Agreement sets equity as a guiding principle of pandemic response, integrates it throughout its structure as a framework for objectives and implementation, and seeks to realize it through concrete institutional mechanisms, thereby underscoring its significance. However, many provisions rely on voluntary or recommendatory language, binding enforcement and dispute settlement mechanisms are absent, and the Agreement cannot be opened for signature until the PABS annex is adopted, creating structural uncertainties. Moreover, the effective participation of major developed states and private manufacturers is decisive for the functioning of key mechanisms concerning access to medicines and vaccines, technology transfer, and global supply chains. Ultimately, the legal effect and global impact of the Agreement depend on how the institutional framework operates, how the PABS system is elaborated, and whether international solidarity based on equity can be sustained in practice.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University
Published
2025-08-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.38133/cnulawreview.2025.45.3.399
Primary Topic
COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Legal Analysis of the WHO Pandemic Agreement : Content, Significance, and Limitations

Jina Park
Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University
COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
article

A Legal Analysis of the WHO Pandemic Agreement : Content, Significance, and Limitations

Jina Park
article en

Abstract

At its Seventy-eighth session in 2025, the World Health Assembly adopted the WHO Pandemic Agreement under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution. The Agreement was developed against the backdrop of deficiencies in the existing international health law regime and the inequities revealed during the COVID-19 pandemic. It establishes equity and solidarity as core principles throughout all stages of pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, and seeks to institutionalize them through specific mechanisms. The adoption of the Agreement represents an important step toward institutionalizing multilateral health governance on a legal basis. This study analyzes the Agreement from an international legal perspective and aims to evaluate its normative significance and limitations. It focuses on the structure and 35 articles of the Agreement, examines the legal nature and operational functions of each institutional arrangement, and clarifies its complementary and developmental relationship with the International Health Regulations (2005). Particular attention is given to the One Health approach, strengthening health systems and workforce capacities, frameworks for research and development and technology transfer, the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) system, global supply chains and procurement mechanisms, and the establishment and authority of the Conference of the Parties. The study critically assesses the potential for institutionalizing equity and solidarity, identifies structural constraints affecting feasibility and effectiveness, and reviews principles and obligations proposed during negotiations but ultimately excluded or diluted in the final text—such as common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) and mandatory financial contributions. The Agreement sets equity as a guiding principle of pandemic response, integrates it throughout its structure as a framework for objectives and implementation, and seeks to realize it through concrete institutional mechanisms, thereby underscoring its significance. However, many provisions rely on voluntary or recommendatory language, binding enforcement and dispute settlement mechanisms are absent, and the Agreement cannot be opened for signature until the PABS annex is adopted, creating structural uncertainties. Moreover, the effective participation of major developed states and private manufacturers is decisive for the functioning of key mechanisms concerning access to medicines and vaccines, technology transfer, and global supply chains. Ultimately, the legal effect and global impact of the Agreement depend on how the institutional framework operates, how the PABS system is elaborated, and whether international solidarity based on equity can be sustained in practice.

Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National UniversityVol. 45(3)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.