Page - 537 - in VULNERABLE - The Law, Policy and Ethics of COVID-19

537The Plausibility and Resolvability of Legal Claims Against China and WHO under… Claim 1: The People’s Republic of China Failed to Promptly Report IHR Article 6 governing notification requires that: Each State Party shall notify WHO … within 24 hours of assess- ment of public health information, of all events which may consti- tute a public health emergency of international concern … as well as any health measure implemented in response… Article 7 provides that: If a State Party has evidence of an … unusual public health event within its territory, irrespective of origin or source, which may constitute a public health emergency of international concern, it shall provide to WHO all relevant public health information… Several states accuse the PRC of violating Articles 6 and 7. The known timeline is that on December 10, 2019, one of the earliest coronavi- rus patients became ill. On December 16, the patient was admitted to Wuhan Central Hospital with a treatment-resistant lung infec- tion. Between December 16 and December 27, cases multiplied. On December 27, health officials in Wuhan were told that an unclear cause was behind atypical pneumonia cases, and asked that information about those cases be compiled and transmitted. On Dec. 31, the PRC informed WHO’s China office of the pneumonia cases. WHO officials responded with questions and offers of assistance. China notified the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on January 3, 2020. There is some question as to whether “all events” were notified either to WHO, as the IHR require, or to other States Parties. For exam- ple, PRC national authorities (as opposed to local or provincial author- ities) were investigating the novel coronavirus by December 30, and perhaps earlier. If a violation of the notification provisions occurred, the question would then arise whether that violation was “material.”