Human rights limitations in global health law reforms

On May 20, 2025, the World Health Assembly adopted the WHO Pandemic Agreement, complementing 2024 amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR). While these reforms aim to strengthen pandemic preparedness, address inequities, and support resilient health systems, their final texts fall short of embedding human rights as a central pillar. Despite rights violations during COVID-19 prompting global calls for reform, the instruments soften explicit rights commitments with broader principles of "equity" and "solidarity," which lack the legal precision and accountability of human rights law. We examine the implications of this shift, assessing how it may limit rights-based accountability in pandemic governance. Without deliberate institutional design-particularly within the Conference of the Parties (COP) process-these reforms risk an "implementation trap" where ambitious goals lack enforceable follow-through. We propose concrete measures to integrate human rights into governance, monitoring, and reporting to ensure the Pandemic Agreement fulfills its equity, solidarity, and rights promise.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Health
Published
2025-12-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2025.106081
Primary Topic
COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human rights limitations in global health law reforms

Neil Sircar, Benjamin Mason Meier, Safura Abdool Karim, Lisa Forman
Public Health
COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
article

Human rights limitations in global health law reforms

Neil Sircar, Benjamin Mason Meier, Safura Abdool Karim, Lisa Forman
article en

Abstract

On May 20, 2025, the World Health Assembly adopted the WHO Pandemic Agreement, complementing 2024 amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR). While these reforms aim to strengthen pandemic preparedness, address inequities, and support resilient health systems, their final texts fall short of embedding human rights as a central pillar. Despite rights violations during COVID-19 prompting global calls for reform, the instruments soften explicit rights commitments with broader principles of "equity" and "solidarity," which lack the legal precision and accountability of human rights law. We examine the implications of this shift, assessing how it may limit rights-based accountability in pandemic governance. Without deliberate institutional design-particularly within the Conference of the Parties (COP) process-these reforms risk an "implementation trap" where ambitious goals lack enforceable follow-through. We propose concrete measures to integrate human rights into governance, monitoring, and reporting to ensure the Pandemic Agreement fulfills its equity, solidarity, and rights promise.

Public HealthVol. 250
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US), University of Minnesota (US), University of Minnesota System (US), Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (ZA), Public Health Ontario (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
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.

Human rights limitations in global health law reforms — Neil Sircar, Benjamin Mason Meier, et al. · Public Health (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS