Recently disclosed vaccine contracts between South Africa and various pharmaceutical companies have raised concerns over “pharmaceutical bullying,” according to analysts.
A High Court ruling in Gauteng, South Africa, compelled the National Department of Health to reveal all contracts related to COVID-19 vaccine procurement, according to Devex.com.
The Health Justice Initiative, a local public health and law initiative, had long sought these documents, alleging they were vital for the public interest.
The unveiled contracts have painted a concerning picture, indicating that South Africa faced stringent conditions to secure these critical supplies.
Notably, the nation paid higher prices for certain vaccines than some wealthier European countries.
For instance, South Africa paid the Serum Institute of India $5.25 per dose for a generic version of the AstraZeneca vaccine, 2.5 times the amount the EU paid for a similar vaccine.
Likewise, the cost for the Pfizer vaccine stood at $10 a dose, in contrast to the $6.75 reportedly paid by the African Union.
While Johnson & Johnson cited a “final global price of $7.50 per dose,” records show South Africa was billed $10 per dose, with the EU only paying $8.50.
Matthew Herder, director of the Health Law Institute at Dalhousie University, emphasized the imbalance in these agreements.
“These provisions shift virtually all of the risk, all of the cost, all of the burden onto the South African government,” he stated. “It was a very one-sided endeavor.”
Additionally, the contracts contained clauses that posed further complications.
For instance, export bans and vaccine donations to other nations require companies’ consent.
Furthermore, broad indemnification clauses protected the corporations from potential claims, transferring much of the liability to the South African government.
If Pfizer failed to deliver the promised doses, the South African government could only reclaim 50% of the upfront payment.
Global Justice Now’s director, Nick Dearden, criticized the lack of transparency, stating that the released papers show that when secrecy is allowed to rule, “the pharmaceutical corporations involved gain tremendous amounts of power. And they use that power to undermine global equity, and to undermine the public interest.”
The contracts also brought the global COVAX initiative into the spotlight.
Although designed to provide equitable access to vaccines, COVAX did not offer clear indications about vaccine distribution.
South Africa’s contract with COVAX lacked specific guarantees regarding dose numbers, pricing, or delivery dates.
While South Africa committed to procure 12 million doses from COVAX, it only ordered 1.4 million doses.
However, it remains responsible for manufacturer costs.
A spokesperson from vaccine alliance Gavi, backing COVAX, shared: “COVAX worked with manufacturers to provide investments and incentives for manufacturers to be ready to produce the doses needed as soon as a vaccine was approved.”
They added that countries like South Africa could see returns from the facility in “2024 and beyond.”
In light of these revelations, advocates are pushing for a pandemic accord addressing the monopolistic powers of pharmaceutical firms, emphasizing the need for transparency.
“Our sovereignty was taken away at the behest of very powerful pharmaceutical companies who are unelected, and basically hold no public office in our country. And this should never happen again,” said Fatima Hassan, founder of the Health Justice Initiative.
