On Thursday, 14 November 2024, Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) delivered the following statement on Article 11 on the transfer of technology and know-how for the production of pandemic related health products.
In several interventions and in talks with negotiators, KEI has provided evidence that governments can and do use both voluntary and non-voluntary measures for technology transfer. Some large drug and vaccine companies have lobbied negotiators in a handful of high income countries to add language to this agreement that would define tech transfer as voluntary measures, giving the misleading impression that states have no power to regulate or mandate. Footnote 1(j) to Article 11 is presented as a compromise. While it does provide legal space for non-voluntary measures, it introduces an impression that voluntary approaches have more legitimacy. The only reason to do this is to allow companies and trading partners to pressure developing countries that consider mandates of any kind. Some modest changes would fix this.
Instead of saying that technology transfer refers to mutually agreed or voluntary measures, it should say that [measures to promote or provide incentives to] technology transfer [may] involve mutually agreed terms and voluntary measures. Which is true. And the language on “without prejudice to measures” should be expanded to say, “without prejudice to [other] measures,” to clarify the contrast with the voluntary approaches.
This is the World Health Organization. Let the agreement speak clearly and accurately on this point.
End statement
KEI Suggested edits to the footnote in 1(j) in Article 11, to share later with delegates
For the purposes of this Agreement, [measures to promote or provide incentives to] Transfer of Technology [may] refers to a mutually agreed process where technology is shared consensually. [These measures are] This understanding is without prejudice to [other] measures that Parties may take in accordance with their domestic or national legislation and does not affect any rights they may exercise under it, provided that these measures are in line with their relevant international obligations regarding intellectual property rights.