SISMUN 2020 UNGA (LEGAL):

1. Table of Contents
2. Introduction to the chairs-
3. Brief overview of the agendas
4. Historical background 
5. Definitions of key terms
6. Stances of important countries involved
7. Questions a Resolution must answer
8. Bibliography and suggested further reading

Agenda 1:
The patent for the COVID-19 vaccine should be a universal patent.

Brief overview:
This agenda focuses on whether there should be a universal patent issued on
the COVID-19 vaccine and the possible implications this might have on
developing, under-developing and developed nations. The COVID-19
pandemic has adversely affected our lives and re-shaped our economies;
hence it is no surprise that there is an urgent need for a vaccine. The race to
come up with, what could be the most coveted resource of our time, has
already begun. But the real question is what happens after a vaccine is
discovered. During the Geneva conference held by the World Health
Organisation (WHO) on 19th April 2005, the intellectual property rights on
vaccines and its impact on the world was extensively discussed. Various
clauses were added to the TRIPS agreement to facilitate the incorporation of
all countries in the ongoing crisis following the SARs outbreak in 2002.
However, taking into account the ineffectiveness of world leaders to handle
the situation, it is evident that a concrete solution to the problem is yet to be
formed.

Historical background:
The first outbreak of the coronavirus was witnessed as early as 2002. The
SARs coronavirus (also known as SARS-CoV) first originated in China and
like COVID-19, gradually spread across the globe. Although it’s yet to be
confirmed, scientists suspect that the epidemic stemmed from “an uncertain
animal reservoir.” The aftermath of this epidemic included the formation of
the ‘Pandemic Playbook,’ issued by the Obama administration in 2016.
The document is a 69-page National Security Council guidebook developed
with the aim of assisting leaders “in coordinating a complex U.S.
Government response to a high-consequence emerging disease threat
anywhere in the world.” It includs a list of priorities for federal officials to
adopt in the event of a pandemic.

The Oxford-AstraZeneca agreement:

COVID-19 has made accessibility concerns over medicines universal.

Currently, the Oxford University is developing, what seems to be, a
promising COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in partnership with the
private pharmaceutical enterprise- AstraZeneca. The Oxford-AstraZeneca
agreement envisages exclusive rights (via patents and trade secrets) and the
use of IP licensing. In this regard, Oxford University Innovation (OUI) has
made public its policy for third-party access to university IP relevant to
COVID-19.

The aim is to facilitate access to Oxford IP to enable global deployment at

scale of associated products and services to address the COVID-19
pandemic. The University and OUI will provide non-exclusive, royalty-free
licences to support free of charge, at-cost or cost + limited margin supply as
appropriate, and only for the duration of the pandemic, as defined by the
WHO. The term clearly states that they grant to a licensee of access to IP
“does not guarantee it will be granted downstream commercial rights.”
Although this comes across as a reasonable solution and grants universal
access to the vaccine, the clause states that this approach will only apply for
the ‘duration of the pandemic.’ This raises major concerns as local outbreaks
and cases may still be on the rise in developing even in the absence of a
pandemic.

IP Considerations for a vaccine: 

Articles 27-38 of the TRIPS agreement state that patents protect inventions
and highlights the broad range of ‘undisclosed information’ which includes
information relating to vaccine production processes and aspects of vaccine
clinical trial or other test data. intellectual property rights such as trade mark
or ‘brand’ protection may also impact vaccine production.
Baring in mind TRIPS Articles 27.1, a patent shall be granted for an
invention only if it passes certain necessary tests. A new vaccine may include
wide range of inventions, each of which may be separately patented, and may
therefore have a ‘portfolio’ of associated patents.  TRIPS Art 29.1, further
stresses the need applications for patents to be published. Under this article,
authorities have to disclose to the public the invention will be carried out. A
patent application will also disclose what the limits of the monopoly applied
for are, the patent ‘claims’, based on the description of the invention in the
patent application. as the preamble to the TRIPS Agreement makes clear,
Patents are private and as a result it should be down to the patent holder to
sue a third party if they “infringe” the patent holders rights.

GAVI:
COVAX is one of three pillars of the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT)
Accelerator, which was launched in April by the World Health Organization
(WHO), the European Commission and France in response to the present
pandemic. GAVI (the Vaccine Alliance) is co-leading COVAX. This entails
coordinating the COVAX facility which is a global risk-sharing mechanism
for pooled procurement and equitable distribution of eventual COVID-19
vaccines. a public-private partnership that aims to vaccinate and immunise a
whole generation and having protected more than 13 million lives against
diseases such as cholera, meningitis and yellow fever in the past two decades;
GAVI is now focused on providing a universally accessible vaccine. It brings
together developing countries and governments, the WHO, along with other
private enterprises, to pool their resources and improve global health security.
A total of 156 economies, representing roughly 64% of the global population,
are now either committed to or eligible for the COVAX Facility so far.

Country Stances:
On august 16th 2020, Russian president Vladimir Putin announced the
world’s first registered COVID-19 vaccine- Sputnik V. health minister
Mikhali Murashko announced that Russia will offer the vaccine after all the
countries citizens are vaccinated. The response to this accomplishment has
been varied. Countries like India have declined the proposal to test the
vaccine. This stems from the scepticism and desire to come up with their
own vaccine. Besides the safety and efficiency of the vaccine, world leaders
have called into question the patent rights that the vaccine holds. Article 29.1
of the TRIPS agreement clearly states- Applications for patents are published
and must disclose to the public how to carry out the invention. Since April
2020, three Russian patents relating to the treatment of COVID-19 have
been granted. Patent RU 2 728 821(granted on 31 July 2020) discloses a
method of treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome, Patent RU 2 728
938 (granted on 3 August 2020) discloses the use of a medicinal product
comprising said hexapeptide as active ingredient, and according to patent RU
2 728 939 (granted on 3 August 2020), the hexapeptide or pharmaceutically
acceptable salt can be used in the treatment process.
While Russia was the first nation to register a novel vaccine, the Chinese
vaccine (CanSino, Ad5-nCOV) has been granted patent for authorisation.
India is not far behind in this race to come up with a vaccine- on 15 th august
2020 prime minister Narendra Modi announced that India is ready for the
mass-production of a COVID-19 vaccine as soon as it passes the trials.

Key terms:
● Patent: A patent is an exclusive right granted that protects an
invention from infringement
● Patent protection: means that the invention cannot be commercially
made, used, distributed, imported, or sold by others without the patent
owner's consent.
● Intellectual Property (IP) refers to creations of the mind, a unique idea
that has no physical form.
● Pandemic: an epidemic spread across the globe.
● WIPO (The World Intellectual Property Organization): specialised UN
Agency dedicated to the development of an accessible and balanced
international system for intellectual property.

Questions a resolution must answer:

1. What are the consequences of patenting a vaccine? 
2. How are developing countries affected?
3. Should the country/countries associated with the outbreak of the virus
be held accountable?
4. How was government support eased the strain on public private
enterprises working on the vaccine?
5. How would a universal vaccine work in the real world?

bibliography -
1) “GAVI – The Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations.”
World Health Organization, World Health Organization, 11 Dec. 2010,
 www.who.int/workforcealliance/members_partners/member_list/gavi
/en/.

2) “SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome).” World Health

Organization, World Health Organization, 26 Apr. 2012,
www.who.int/ith/diseases/sars/en/.

3) JadeScipioni. “She Helped Write the White House 'Pandemic

Playbook.' Here's What Keeps Her up at Night and Her Advice for
Trump.” CNBC, CNBC, 30 June 2020,
www.cnbc.com/2020/06/26/beth-cameron-helped-write-the-white-
house-pandemic-playbook.html.

4) ABC News, ABC News Network, abcnews.go.com/Health/run-

plays-officials-trump-administration-pandemic- playbooks/story?
id=71999769.

5) About the author Luke McDonagh Luke McDonagh is an

Assistant Professor in the Department of Law, et al. “Could University
Patents Stand in the Way of Universal Global Access to a COVID-19
Vaccine?” LSE Covid-19, 10 Sept. 2020,
blogs.lse.ac.uk/covid19/2020/09/10/could-university-patents-stand-in-the-
way-of-universal-global-access-to-a-covid-19-vaccine/.

6) “What Is Intellectual Property (IP)?” WIPO, www.wipo.int/about-

ip/en/.

7) “NIH.” National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, www.niaid.nih.gov/.

Agenda 2: To recommend Right to Internet as a Basic Human Right and

include the same in Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

Table of contents -
1) What are human rights
2) History of idea
3) Right to internet and freedom of speech
 4) Censorship
5) Questions a resolution must answer.
6) bibliography

What are human rights -

Human rights are a set of mandatory rights which are guaranteed to all
human beings regardless of their background . Human rights include the
right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of
opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many more.
Everyone has the privilege to enjoy these rights without discrimination.

What is the UDHR -

The UDHR was one of the most important documents in the history of
human rights. It was drafted by representatives of various legal backgrounds
on the 10th of december 1948.

History of the Idea

A survey conducted for the BBC World Service between 30 November 2009
and 7 February 2010 of 27,973 adults in 26 countries, including 14,306
internet users, found that almost four in five internet users and non-users
around the world thought that internet access was a fundamental right. 50
percent strongly agreed, 29 percent somewhat agreed, 9 percent somewhat
disagreed, 6 percent gave no opinion.

In May 2011, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the the promotion
and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La
Rue, submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council a study
"Exploring key developments and threats to the right of all people to
discover, obtain and impart knowledge and ideas from all forms of media."
88 recommendations were made in the report on the promotion and security
of the right to freedom of speech online, some of which included maintaining
access to the Internet.

The Internet Society conducted online interviews of over 10,000 internet

users in 20 countries in July and August 2012. In response to the comment,
"Internet access should be treated as a fundamental human right." 83 percent
answered that they agreed somewhat or strongly. 14%, said they slightly or
strongly disagreed with it and 3% didn't know.

A non-binding resolution condemning deliberate obstruction of internet

connectivity by governments was issued by the United Nations Human
Rights Council in the summer of 2016. The resolution reaffirmed that "the
same rights people have offline must also be protected online". Recent
experience by UN treaty-based bodies demonstrates an increasing interest in
maintaining Internet connectivity.

Right to Internet and Freedom of Speech

The right to access the Internet is closely related to the right to freedom of
speech, which can also be considered to include freedom of expression.
Stephanie Borg Psaila-the substance of the Internet and the infrastructure of
the Internet-illustrates two main aspects of the Internet. In order to provide
service to the masses, the infrastructure is necessary but needs
comprehensive positive action. However, the content loaded onto the
Internet is regarded as something that should be open to everyone.

Censorship

The strength of the Internet is said to lie in its exclusion from the regulation
of information by the government. Any person can publish anything online
on the Internet, which enables people to circumvent official sources of
information from the government. This has challenged governing regimes
and, in times of turmoil, has contributed to many censoring or cutting
Internet access.

China and Iran are probably the world's two main users of censorship. To
block any information from the Internet that they consider to be hostile or
harmful to their governments, both nations use comprehensive firewall
systems. If a citizen of these countries is caught using the Internet to disagree
with the government, then they can face serious penalties, including the loss
of civil liberties.

In comparison to this, the US-initiated censorship focuses mostly on the

defence of intellectual property. Although the right to share one's individual
views is acknowledged, there is widespread concern that the misuse of
freedom of speech and censorship may lead to wide-ranging powers granted
in anti-piracy laws.

In essence, the elimination or censorship of the Internet may be seen as a

violation of the human right to free expression. One such specific incident
was in Egypt, where, during the 2011 uprising, the Hosni Mubarak
government shut down the Internet a number of times in an effort to curb
the demonstrations that took place during the Arab Spring. Although
networks were cut off for just a few days, this stifled the ability of Egyptians
to access essential services, such as ambulances, which some have blamed for
raising the death toll of protesters.

A third-generation right recognised by the UN General Assembly is the right

to development. Human rights academics and activists have acknowledged
the role of the Internet in protecting this right in many ways. Growing access
to technology such as cell phones has also proven to provide more
opportunities for economic growth for developing nations. For example,
growing access to the Internet will boost the access of low-income
individuals to financial services, such as savings accounts and online trading.

In his 2011 report to the UN Human Rights Council, the UN Special

Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of
Opinion and Speech, Frank La Rue, stressed that "without Internet access,
which facilitates economic development and the enjoyment of a range of
human rights, marginalized groups and developing States remain trapped in a
disadvantaged situation, thereby perpetuating inequality both within and
between States”

In his 2011 report to the UN Human Rights Council, the UN Special

Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of
Opinion and Speech, Frank La Rue, stressed that "without Internet access,
which facilitates economic development and the enjoyment of a range of
human rights, marginalized groups and developing States remain trapped in a
disadvantaged situation, thereby perpetuating inequality both within and
between States.”

Vint Cerf, sometimes referred to as the "father of the Internet," is a high-

profile critique of the idea that access to the Internet should be considered a
human right. Cerf argues that internet access should not in itself be a right.
Cerf sums up his point when he says, "Vint Cerf, sometimes referred to as
the "father of the Internet," is a high-profile critique of the idea that access to
the Internet should be considered a human right. Cerf argues that internet
access should not in itself be a right. Cerf sums up his point when he says,
"Technology is an enabler of freedom, not a right itself.”
Stances of Some Countries

Costa Rica: A ruling by the Supreme Court of Costa Rica on 30 July 2010
stated: "Without fear of confusion, it can be said that these [information
technology and communication] technologies have had an effect on the way
people interact, promoting the interconnection between individuals and
institutions worldwide, and removing space and time barriers."

Estonia: In 2000, a major programme was initiated by parliament to increase

access to the countryside. The Internet is necessary for life in the 21st
century, the government argues.

Finland: According to the Ministry of Transport and Communications, every

person in Finland should have access to a one-megabit per second broadband
link by July 2010, and access to a 100 Mbit / s link by 2015.
France: The Constitutional Council, France's highest court, ruled Internet
access a fundamental human right in June 2009.

Greece: Article 5A of the Greek Constitution specifies that all individuals are
entitled to participate in the Information Society and that the State is obliged
to promote the creation , sharing, dissemination and access of information
transmitted electronically.

India: In September 2019, the Kerala High Court ruled that, under Article 21
of the Constitution, the right to access the internet is part of both the
fundamental right to education and the right to privacy.

Spain: Beginning in 2011, Telefónica, the former state monopoly that retains
the "universal service" contract of the country, must guarantee that at least
one megabit per second of "reasonably" priced broadband is provided
throughout Spain.

Note - these are just some of the points to get you started. Don’t be limited
by these and abide by your foreign policy by conducting extra research as
well.

Questions a resolution must answer

1) What measures should be taken to improve internet access
2) What measures should be taken to ensure internet safety
3) What measures should be taken to regulate censorship?
4) What laws should be drafted and implemented for internet
censorship and it’s limits.
5) Should a special UN body be formed to regulate censorship and
maintain internet rights internationally

Bibliography
1. WSIS: Declaration of Principles ,
www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs/geneva/official/dop.html.
2. “Internet Access Is 'a Fundamental Right'.” BBC News, BBC, 8 Mar. 2010,
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8548190.stm.

3.https://www.amnestyusa.org/is-internet-access-a-human-right/

4. Wilson, Jenny. “United Nations Report Declares Internet Access a Human

Right.” Time, Time, 7 June 2011, techland.time.com/2011/06/07/united-
nations-report-declares-internet-access-a-human-right/.

5. Correspondent, Special. “Access to Internet Is a Basic Right, Says Kerala

High Court.” The Hindu, The Hindu, 20 Sept. 2019, www.thehindu.com/sci-
tech/technology/internet/access-to-internet-is-a-basic-right-says-kerala-high-
court/article29462339.ece.

6.“Government Policy for the Internet Must Be Rights-Based and User-

Centred.” United Nations, United Nations,
www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/government-policy-internet-must-be-
rights-based-and-user-centred.