Plenary Sessions PLENARY AND GRO U P D ISCU SSIO NS
Report of the First Regional Consultation of National IH R Focal Points
Page 18
A The current IHR has been signed by most states. So here we are only dealing with a revision process. M ember States would be free to either reject or
endorse the revised IH R. If they reject the revised IH R, they would still be bound to the current IH R. They could also accept the revised IH R with
reservations on particular articles. Australia, for example, is not a signatory to the current IH R. Also, India had accepted the current IHR but with
reservations regarding yellow fever as they were of the opinion that the measures in it did not adequately protect their country against importation of
the disease.
Q M edia response during emergencies needs particular skills. Whether training
courses for the media are envisaged in the IH R process?
A W H O has been involved in training for emergencies in different countries but
mainly for health personnel e.g. NICD conducting EPR courses in India. Efforts should be towards better “ risk communication” so that the health
authorities are trained to release information through the media to the public in such a manner as to avoid creating panicalarm. O perational packages
could be developed towards that end.
Q What happens w hen a Member State is not convinced that an outbreakevent in their country is a public health emergency? Even after the Expert Committee
EC reports it as a PH EIC the M S could still not accept it as a PH EIC. A
If a M ember State does not agree to report an outbreak, the Expert Committee EC, which is external to W H O would give its opinion. The Director-General
of W H O would then declare the emergency based on the recommendations of EC. This is a responsibility of all M ember States and not only the affected
state. It is expected that this would be a rare occurrence. The draft is very clear under which circumstances information under Article 5 would be
shared with other M S. If a Member State has an outbreak, it would be difficult to suppress this information as in today’s world this information is available
through reports by neighbouring countries, the media and on the web sites public domain. If a M S is not responding to the verification process, then this
unofficial information would be put out by W HO which may be inaccurate, based on rumours and more damaging.
Q What w ould be the penalty to a M S for non-compliance?
A The revised IH R has no penalty for non-compliance. W HO is in favour of a
positive relationship with M S. Those that are in a better position to exert influence are neighbouring countries and trade partners. Hence this is a
stronger incentive for compliance.
International H ealth Regulations
Page 19
Q What are the trends in O IE, FAO and other International organizations in the
related areas of IH R?
A W H O is learning to work better with O IE, FAO and other international
organizations after SARS and avian flu. This is particularly so in the area of importation of livestock and foodstuffs. The organizations are also in the
process of redesigning their systems of notification for reporting diseases in animals and are compatible with our present notification system. O IE has
come out with a long list of diseases in animals which they are closely monitoring.
Q H ow does the IH R regulate check pointsporous borders betw een countries w here no legal permits are required?
A Land borders are best monitored through bilateral relationship with M S.
H ealth services on both sides of the border would be more effective in disease control rather than through W HO .
Q Infected affected areas should be declared at national, state and district levels
as this has been an effective method of control in the past. A
These measures were usually applied automatically and countries were not declared free later. W HO is not in favour as this leads to unnecessary
stigmatization?
Q The imposition of some measures w ould be subjective and could be different in different circumstances.
A It was agreed that since the decisions would be made by human beings, it was
bound to be subjective but under the proposed IH R these decisions would be based on the criteria and indicators given in Annex 2.
Q A new feature in the IH R is that WH O w ould be supporting M S in outbreak investigations through multi-disciplinary teams and also through transportation
of laboratory samples to reference laboratories. Countries may not be w illing for such support.
A Countries may not wish W H O to assist them. W H O would not send teams
into countries without the clearance of M ember States. Q Some positive recommendations by WH O should also be given w hen unfair or
unjustified measures are applied to a country by some countries. A
Positive recommendations like no travel and trade restrictions recommended will be made for countries experiencing unfair trade and travel restrictions
Report of the First Regional Consultation of National IH R Focal Points
Page 20
which are not appropriate to an outbreak in the M S. W H O will be willing to give them Annex 2.
Q Annexes in the IH R should be review ed along w ith the general recommendations and not separately.
A This is imperative as the core document is more of a legal document whereas
the annexes explain in detail the various provisions under IH R Q M any issues w ere raised regarding the national focal point NFP. Some felt that
if the focal point w as not a high level official like a health minister or D irector- General of H ealth Services, he w ould not be sufficiently empow ered to deal
directly w ith WH O . O ther issues like logistic support for focal point, equipping properly for surveillance and resource mobilization w ere also raised.
A The NFP issue has baffled a number of M S. The focal point is required to
facilitate rapid communication with W H O . A high official would be difficult to contact or would not be easily accessible. An operational mechanism could be
developed by M S for easy functioning of the focal point including political clearance. M S should therefore nominate the right focal point. Regarding
support to the focal point, strengthening laboratory services and logistics, these would be tackled through the development of core capacity of countries
which is also in the interest of M S. IH R and W H O would be behind this support. M S could also assist neighboring states to develop core capacities
Ø
IH R puts roles and responsibilities at different levels. Requires some level of commitment from both M S and W H O . This partnership is
necessary for sustainability.
Ø
Concern was expressed regarding free compulsory vaccination for e.g. yellow fever, cholera and meningitis as this would be a burden
to some countries.
Q Saudi Arabia during H aj had suddenly insisted on H aj travellers getting tetravalent vaccines w hich w ere not easily available and very expensive.
Timely information of vaccine requirements by some countries should be provided.
A In fact, W HO would not recommend a vaccine if it is not available. Any
changes in vaccine requirements are usually published in W ER based on recommendations of countries. Routine requirements of vaccination by
countries are published annually in the International Travellers H ealth.
Q What is the mechanism to assess if excess or inadequate measures w ere to be applied to a country and w hen to declare it is over and measures should stop?
International H ealth Regulations
Page 21
A If W H O comes to know about excessive measures being applied, it would
question the M S concerned as to why these measures are being implemented. W H O would then get back to the complaining country.
Q What are the standards or guidelines on w hich the expert committee w ould make their recommendations?
A It would be up to the Expert Committee to go through all the available
epidemiological, operational and other information prior to making appropriate recommendations.
Q D efine the meaning of additional health measures and w hether this is in line w ith IH R. e.g. migrants w ith H IV not allow ed into some countries
A It is reasonable to carry out health checks of migrants since it has long-term
implications for future health care and responsibility. Also, in the case of mass exodus, refugees, and other incidents the risk of outbreaks justify additional
health measures.
Article 39- transportation of infectious material lab samples and Article 36 -
rights of persons are important articles. These could be discussed in the deliberations at country-level meetings.
Q Nuclear, biological and chemical issues w hich potentially fit the criteria of PH EIC should also be covered by IH R
A These are covered under intentional PH EIC and W H O would investigate
verify and support M S to carry out appropriate response at the country level. Q
H ow w ill IH R apply to territoriescommunities w ho are not M S of WH O ?
A The W H O Legal Counsel will take these situations on merit and will deal with
them accordingly. Q What do you think about running dummy outbreak exercises?
A Training for emergencies: A number of training is carried out at present, for
example through FETP. M ay be risk communication is an area we need to provide training on.
Q Can M S totally reject or take exception to certain parts of regulations? A
Yes. Australia is not a signatory to the current regulations. M S can also take reservation to certain articles - like India on current IH R. If a large number of
M S reject IH R, it loses its value.
Q What if a state and WH O disagree on PH EIC?
Report of the First Regional Consultation of National IH R Focal Points
Page 22
A The expert committee - experts of international standing, and the Director-
General will determine what action to be taken in the collective interest of all M S.
Q A definition for infected area is not included in the draft? Why w e remove infected area from IH R?
A Infected area leads to unnecessary stigmatization and once declared, the area
is forever considered infected area. Q SARS w as declared late by China. What w as the action taken by WH O for late
reporting? A
The damage caused by late reporting was evident in China during SARS. No specific penalty was imposed by W H O .
Q D uring bird flu, the animal health part w as found to be w eak, and food safety demands a more pro-active surveillance and intervention programme. H ow IH R
see this area in relation to outbreak management? A
O IE and FAO were learning to work with other agencies. EU for example stopped embargo on receiving W HO reassurance.
2 Related issues and recommendations
Ø
Excessive measures: M ember States would like to know what measures will be considered as
excessive measures
Ø
M ember States would also like to be aware of standards and principles to be applied when measures are recommended.
Ø
The scaling-up of functions of health authorities at points of affected areaoutbreak need to be statedelaborated in the draft.
Ø
PH EIC needs to be covered under definitions.
Ø
Selection of expert committee -see annex 10 - needs elaboration.
Ø
Points of exit are equally important as points of entry. During SARS outbreak, measures at exit points were as predominant as at entry
points. So both exit and entry points must be defined and inserted in the text appropriately.
Ø
To ensure quality of vaccination provided to the public as well as to reassure the international community regarding vaccination given to
travellers during outbreaks, vaccination must be carried out by a state designated and recognized body.
Ø
The main challenge to the implementation of IH Rs is to develop and maintain effective, district-focused national surveillance system and
to link this to sub-regional, regional and international surveillance
International H ealth Regulations
Page 23
and response networks. W e need to devise a mechanism to overcome these.
Ø
The other main challenge is to establish and maintain a national notification system of PH EIC and to link it with effective and prompt
response mechanism. There is a need to address this issue.