June, 10 2021, 09:32am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
G7 Support for Pharma Monopolies Is Putting Millions of Lives at Risk
The self-interest of G7 countries is the biggest obstacle to ending the Covid-19 pandemic, a group of campaigning organizations said today. Ahead of the G7 Leaders' Summit, the People's Vaccine Alliance warned that G7 promises to vaccinate the world by 2022 will be impossible to fulfill, if governments continue blocking proposals to waive patents and share life-saving technology.
WASHINGTON
The self-interest of G7 countries is the biggest obstacle to ending the Covid-19 pandemic, a group of campaigning organizations said today. Ahead of the G7 Leaders' Summit, the People's Vaccine Alliance warned that G7 promises to vaccinate the world by 2022 will be impossible to fulfill, if governments continue blocking proposals to waive patents and share life-saving technology.
Last year South Africa and India - also invited to this week's summit in the UK - proposed waiving intellectual property rules to allow other countries to manufacture Covid-19 tests, treatments and vaccines. The proposal is supported by more than 100 states.
The English county of Cornwall, where the G7 Summit takes place, has administered more vaccinations than 22 African countries combined.
Of the G7 nations, only the US has explicitly supported waiving patents for vaccines - though not for treatments or diagnostics - and Japan has said it will not oppose the moves if they are agreed. Germany and the UK continue to vehemently oppose the plan, despite its potential to massively increase vaccine production and save millions of lives, while Canada, Italy and France remain on the fence.
"The English county of Cornwall, where the G7 Summit takes place, has administered more vaccinations than 22 African countries combined. This is just one example of how the failure to fight pharma monopolies has created staggering inequalities in vaccine access. This unconscionable failure of global leadership must be rectified immediately," said Steve Cockburn, Amnesty International's Head of Economic and Social Justice.
"The path we are currently on does not benefit anybody. There is no way life can return to normal, anywhere, if people in just a handful of countries are vaccinated. There will be no end in sight until rich countries stop hoarding vaccines, stop supporting pharma monopolies, and start facing up to their international obligations."
Anna Marriott, Oxfam's Health Policy lead, said:
"This week G7 leaders will talk about a global goal to vaccinate the whole world by the end of 2022. But without commitments to waive intellectual property rules and share vaccine technology, this will simply not be possible.
"The G7 have a choice this week. They can continue to defend the indefensible monopolies of pharmaceutical giants - or they can change course, and save millions of lives."
The People's Vaccine Alliance - a coalition of organizations including Amnesty International, Health Justice Initiative, Oxfam, Stop AIDS Campaign and UNAIDS - has calculated that if current trends continue, it will take the world's poorest countries until 2078 to vaccinate their populations. Meanwhile G7 countries are on track to vaccinate their populations by January 2022. By the end of May 2021, 42% of people in G7 countries had received at least one vaccine dose, compared to less than 1% in low-income countries.
The G7 have a choice this week. They can continue to defend the indefensible monopolies of pharma giants - or they can change course, and save millions of lives.
28% of the Covid-19 vaccines that had been delivered by the end of May were in G7 countries, which represent just 10% of the world's population. The UK alone has administered nearly twice as many jabs than the entire African continent, despite its population being twenty times smaller.
Increased vaccine production blocked by richest nations
At the summit, G7 leaders are expected to announce plans to share some surplus doses with poorer countries, but this falls far short of what is needed.
Crucially, G7 countries - home to many of the largest vaccine manufacturers - have stood in the way of proposals to waive intellectual property rules on Covid-19 vaccines, tests and treatments. Following a groundbreaking announcement by President Joe Biden in May, the US is currently the only G7 member which supports a waiver on vaccines. Germany and the UK remain fiercely opposed - as does the European Union as a bloc - while Canada, Italy and France are undecided. Japan will not oppose the measures if they are agreed.
The vaccine is not even on the horizon for many at-risk groups in developing countries, including doctors and nurses who continue to risk their lives every day.
There is also an urgent need for pharmaceutical companies to share their vaccine technology and know-how, in order to support a massive increase in vaccine production. Vaccine developers have received over $100 billion in public funding. To date, not a single vaccine developer has agreed to participate in the World Health Organization's Covid-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP), which was set up over a year ago to facilitate the sharing of intellectual property and technology.
Instead, firms including Moderna and Pfizer are reaping huge profits, and nine new vaccine billionaires have been created.
Dinah Fuentesfina, Asia and Campaign Manager at ActionAid, said:
"G7 leaders are currently making plans to start vaccinating teenagers. Meanwhile, the vaccine is not even on the horizon for many of the most at-risk groups in developing countries, including doctors and nurses who continue to risk their lives every day.
"G7 leaders have an opportunity to be on the side of the millions of people who desperately need vaccines. We're calling on the world's richest countries to put everyone's health above Big Pharma's bottom line."
COVAX in crisis
Meanwhile, the much-heralded COVAX initiative is in crisis. COVAX had distributed 77 million doses by the end of May, just a third of its target by that date. At its current rate of distribution, COVAX is on track to deliver just 250 million doses by the end of this year, equivalent to just 10% of the populations of poorer countries taking part. As a result, countries which relied on COVAX are rapidly running out of vaccines, and many people who received a first dose have no idea when or if they will receive a second one.
Any indication that the G7 will continue to rely on the 'voluntary' agreement of pharmaceutical corporations to do the right thing, should be judged as naive deference to corporations.
This supply crisis is partly due to COVAX's failure to use its huge leverage to challenge pharmaceutical monopolies, and partly because of its overreliance on supply of AstraZeneca vaccines from India, which are now being prioritized for domestic use. COVAX's largest supplier recently announced it would not be able to deliver more vaccines until later in the year.
Donations from rich countries are urgently needed to help save COVAX, but they will not be enough on their own. The need for donations is a symptom of a broken system, where vaccines have been made artificially scarce and hugely expensive.
Fatima Hassan, Founder and Director of Health Justice Initiative in South Africa, said:
"Any indication that the G7 will continue to rely on the 'voluntary' agreement of pharmaceutical corporations to do the right thing, should be judged as naive deference to corporations that are unelected, and who do not prioritize human rights and lives over profits.
"We have the power to end this pandemic - we have multiple, highly successful vaccines, and global mechanisms in place to deliver them. All that stands between us and ending Covid-19 are politics, vested interested and profits based on patents."
A real solution
The People's Vaccine Alliance is calling for the immediate waiving of intellectual property, sharing of technology, and financing for manufacturing worldwide. Alliance members have done the detailed technical analysis that shows that 8 billion doses could be produced in a year, for as little as $25 billion dollars.
G7 leaders must:
- Agree a global goal to vaccinate 60% of the world by the end of 2021, with everyone reached in the next 12 months;
- Support the immediate suspension of intellectual property rules and enforce the transfer of vaccine technology to all qualified vaccine manufacturers in the world;
- Pay their fair share of the money needed to manufacture billions of doses as fast as possible, and support health systems and especially health workers, to ensure they get to every person, free of charge.
The path we are currently on does not benefit anybody. There is no way life can return to normal, anywhere, if people in just a handful of countries are vaccinated.
Background
The People's Vaccine Alliance is a worldwide movement of global and national organizations and activists united under a common aim of campaigning for a 'People's Vaccine' that is available to all, everywhere, free of charge.
The Peoples Vaccine is supported by a host of world leaders, Nobel Laureates, scientists, and religious leaders including the Pope and the Dalai Lama. 2.7 million people have given their support to the aims of the campaign, and opinion polls have shown that 70% of the public in rich nations support the ending of Big Pharma monopolies.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
Wyden Says Spying Bill Would Force Americans to Become an 'Agent for Big Brother'
"If you have access to any communications, the government can force you to help it spy," said Sen. Ron Wyden.
Apr 17, 2024
Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden took to the floor of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday to speak out against a chilling mass surveillance bill that lawmakers are working to rush through the upper chamber and send to President Joe Biden's desk by the end of the week.
The measure in question would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) for two years and massively expand the federal government's warrantless surveillance power by requiring a wide range of businesses and individuals to cooperate with spying efforts.
"If you have access to any communications, the government can force you to help it spy," said Wyden (Ore.), referring to an amendment that was tacked on to the legislation by the U.S. House last week with bipartisan support. "That means anyone with access to a server, a wire, a cable box, a Wi-Fi router, a phone, or a computer. So think for a moment about the millions of Americans who work in buildings and offices in which communications are stored or pass through."
"After all, every office building in America has data cables running through it," the senator continued. "The people are not just the engineers who install, maintain, and repair our communications infrastructure; there are countless others who could be forced to help the government spy, including those who clean offices and guard buildings. If this provision is enacted, the government can deputize any of these people against their will, and force them in effect to become what amounts to an agent for Big Brother—for example, by forcing an employee to insert a USB thumb drive into a server at an office they clean or guard at night."
Wyden said the process "can all happen without any oversight whatsoever: The FISA Court won't know about it, Congress won't know about it. Americans who are handed these directives will be forbidden from talking about it. Unless they can afford high-priced lawyers with security clearances who know their way around the FISA Court, they will have no recourse at all."
Wyden's remarks came after the Senate narrowly approved a motion Tuesday to proceed to the FISA reauthorization bill ahead of Section 702's expiration at the end of the week. The Oregon senator, an outspoken privacy advocate, was among the seven members of the Democratic caucus who voted against the procedural motion.
Despite its grave implications for civil liberties, the bill has drawn relatively little vocal opposition in the Senate. A final vote could come as soon as Thursday.
Titled Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA), the legislation passed the Republican-controlled House last week after lawmakers voted down an amendment that would have added a search warrant requirement to Section 702.
The authority allows U.S. agencies to spy on non-citizens located outside of the country, but it has been abused extensively by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Security Agency to collect the communications of American lawmakers, activists, journalists, and others without a warrant.
Privacy advocates warn RISAA would dramatically expand the scope of Section 702 by broadening the kinds of individuals and businesses required to participate in government spying. A key provision of the bill would mandate cooperation from "electronic communications service providers" such as Google, Verizon, and AT&T as well as "any other service provider who has access to equipment that is being or may be used" to transmit or store electronic communications.
That would mean U.S. intelligence agencies could, without a warrant, compel gyms, grocery stores, barber shops, and other businesses to hand over communications data.
"In the face of the pervasive past misuse of Section 702, the last thing Americans need is a large expansion of government surveillance," Caitlin Vogus, deputy director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, wrote in an op-ed for The Guardian on Tuesday. "The Senate should reject the House bill and refuse to reauthorize Section 702 without a warrant requirement. Lawmakers must demand reforms to put a stop to unjustified government spying on Americans."
Wyden said during his floor speech Tuesday that some of his colleagues "say they aren't worried about President Biden abusing these authorities."
"In that case, how about [former President Donald] Trump? Imagine these authorities in his hands," said Wyden. "If you're worried about having a president who lives to target vulnerable Americans, to pit Americans against each other, to find every conceivable way to punish perceived enemies, you ought to find this bill terrifying."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems Voice 'Deep Concern' Over Biden Claim That Israel Is Legally Using US Arms
A letter from 26 lawmakers notes the "stark differences and gaps" between what Biden administration officials say and the opinions of "prominent experts and global institutions" accusing Israel of genocide.
Apr 16, 2024
More than two dozen House Democrats on Tuesday challenged the Biden administration's claim that Israel is using U.S.-supplied weapons in compliance with domestic and international law—an assertion made amid an ongoing World Court probe of "plausibly" genocidal Israeli policies and practices in Gaza.
Citing "mounting credible and deeply troubling reports and allegations" of human rights crimes committed by Israeli troops in Gaza and soldiers and settlers in the occupied West Bank, 26 congressional Democrats led by Texas Reps. Veronica Escobar—who co-chairs President Joe Biden's reelection campaign—and Joaquin Castro asked U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines "whether and how" their agencies determined Israel is lawfully using arms provided by Washington.
"We write to express our deep concern regarding the U.S. Department of State's recent comments regarding assurances from the Israeli government, under National Security Memorandum (NSM) 20, that the Israeli government is using U.S.-origin weapons in full compliance with relevant U.S. and international law and is not restricting the delivery of humanitarian assistance," the lawmakers wrote in a letter to the Cabinet members.
The letter acknowledges the "grave concerns" of institutions and experts around the world regarding Israel's "conduct throughout the war in Gaza, its policies regarding civilian harm and military targeting, unauthorized expansion of settlements and settler violence in the West Bank, and potential use of U.S. arms by settlers, in additional to limitations on humanitarian aid supported by the U.S."
The legislators noted Israeli attacks on aid convoys, workers, and recipients—like the February 29 "
Flour Massacre" in which nearly 900 starving Palestinians were killed or wounded at a food distribution site—and "the closure of vital border crossings" as Gazan children starve to death as causes for serious concern.
While the lawmakers didn't mention the International Court of Justice's January 26
preliminary finding that Israel is "plausibly" committing genocide in Gaza, their letter highlights the "stark differences and gaps in the statements" made by Biden administration officials and "those made by prominent experts and global institutions"—many of whom accuse Israel of genocide.
The lawmakers' letter came amid reports of fresh Israeli atrocities, including a drone strike on a playground in the Maghazi refugee camp in northern Gaza that killed at least 11 children. Eyewitnesses described a "horrific scene of children torn apart."
While Biden has called out Israel's "indiscriminate bombing" in Gaza—much of it carried out using U.S.-supplied warplanes and munitions including 2,000-pound bombs that can level whole city blocks—his administration has approved more than 100 arms sales to Israel, has repeatedly sidestepped Congress to fast-track emergency armed aid, and is seeking to provide the key ally with billions of dollars in addition weaponry atop the nearly $4 billion it gets annually from Washington.
This, despite multiple federal laws—and the administration's own rules— prohibiting U.S. arms transfers to human rights violators.
According to Palestinian and international officials, more than 110,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since October 7. Most of the dead are women and children. At least 7,000 Palestinians are also missing and presumed dead and buried beneath the rubble of hundreds of thousands of bombed-out homes and other buildings.
Around 90% of Gaza's 2.3 million people have been forcibly displaced in what many Palestinians are calling a second Nakba, a reference to the ethnic cleansing of over 750,000 Arabs from Palestine during the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948.
A growing number of not only progressive lawmakers but also mainstream Democrats are calling for a suspension of U.S. military aid to Israel.
On Tuesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who was criticized earlier in the war for not calling for a cease-fire—stood beside a photo of a starving Gazan girl while declaring "no more money for" the far-right government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his "war machine."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Weasel Words': Julian Assange's Wife Slams US Assurances to UK
"The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism."
Apr 16, 2024
The wife of jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange sharply criticized "assurances" the U.S. government made as the U.K. High Court considers allowing the 52-year-old Australian's extradition to the United States, where he faces 175 years in prison.
The U.S. document states that if extradited, "Assange will have the ability to raise and seek to rely upon at trial (which includes any sentencing hearing) the rights and protections given under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States," though it points out that "a decision as to the applicability of the First Amendment is exclusively within the purview of the U.S. courts."
"A sentence of death will neither be sought nor imposed on Assange," the document adds, noting that he has not been charged with any offense for which that is a possible punishment. It comes after the U.K. court ruled last month that the Biden administration had until Tuesday to confirm that he wouldn't face the death penalty and if it did not, he could continue appealing his extradition.
Responding on social media, his wife, Stella Assange—who is an attorney—blasted the U.S. assurances as "weasel words."
"The United States has issued a nonassurance in relation to the First Amendment, and a standard assurance in relation to the death penalty," she said. "It makes no undertaking to withdraw the prosecution's previous assertion that Julian has no First Amendment rights because he is not a U.S citizen."
"The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
"Instead, the U.S. has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can 'seek to raise' the First Amendment if extradited," she added. "The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism. The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
The U.K. court's next hearing is scheduled for May 20. Last week, reporters asked U.S. President Joe Biden about requests from Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and members of the country's Parliament to drop the extradition effort and charges. He said that "we're considering it."
So far, the Biden administration has ignored significant pressure from Australian and U.S. politicians as well as human rights and press freedom groups, and continued to pursue the extradition of Julian Assange, who was charged under former President Donald Trump—the Republican expected to face the Democratic president in the November election.
Assange was charged under the Espionage Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for publishing classified documents including the "Collateral Murder" video and the Afghan and Iraq war logs. Since British authorities dragged Assange out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London—where he lived with political asylum for seven years—he has been jailed in the city's Belmarsh Prison.
The WikiLeaks founder's wife, with whom he has two children, was not alone in condemning the U.S. assurances on Tuesday.
"This 'assurance' should make journalists even more worried about how the Assange prosecution could impact press freedom in the U.S. and globally. The U.K. should grant Assange's appeal and refuse to extradite him," said the Freedom of the Press Foundation. "The U.S. doesn't disclaim the ability to argue that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Assange because of his nationality or other reasons, or for a court to rule against a First Amendment challenge to his prosecution."
Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, similarly said that "no one who cares about press freedom should take any comfort at all from the United States' assurance that Assange will be permitted to 'rely upon' the First Amendment."
"If the prosecution goes forward, the U.S. government will be trying to persuade American courts that the First Amendment poses no bar to the prosecution of a publisher under the Espionage Act," Jaffer warned. "And if the government is successful, no journalist will ever again be able to publish U.S. government secrets without risking her liberty."
"So the government's First Amendment assurances aren't responsive at all to the concerns that press freedom advocates have been raising," he concluded. "This case poses essentially the same threat to press freedom today as it did yesterday."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular