The Quest for a New Boss for the WHO Launches into Gear

Readers,

The annual meeting for WHO member states that concluded in Geneva last week set into motion an important piece in the governance of global health.

In this edition, we bring you a quick update on the discussions on the election process for a new Director-General of the WHO. At the Executive Board meeting this week, that followed the World Health Assembly, countries articulated what they want out of this election exercise.

Also find a recent opinion piece that I wrote for Geneva Solutions, on what awaits the next DG of the WHO. (Wonderful to collaborate with another newsroom!)

Finally, we also bring you short update on the elections of new members to WHO's Executive Board that met earlier this week. The Board will play a key role in the process of the DG elections when it will shortlist candidates in January 2027, ahead of the Assembly in May 2027.

Geneva Health Files offers value to our readers who are experts in global health. Tracking global health policy-making in Geneva is tough and expensive, without institutional support. For six years, we have provided you with the information and tools that directly contribute to your work in the field. We rely on our readers who value news they can use.

By becoming a paying subscriber you make our work possible. Our subscribers contribute towards greater accountability in global health.

Priti

Priti Patnaik, Founder & Publisher, Geneva Health Files

Feel free to write to us: genevahealthfiles@gmail.com ; Find us on BlueSky, Instagram and Linkedin.

I. EB159 UPDATE

The Quest for a New Boss for the WHO Launches into Gear

Compiled by Shubhangi Thakur & Priti Patnaik

Earlier this week, the WHO Executive Board adopted a report on the Process for the election of the Director-General of the World Health Organization.
We discussed the timeline and the various steps involved in election process here.
Candidates forum decided for 18th November 2026, and then 15th March 2027.
Some member states took the floor on this topic:

China (EB member)

Stated that the election of the DG is “one of the most important governance processes of the organisation.”
Emphasised that a fair, transparent, member state-led election process with due regard for geographical representation is essential to the authority, credibility, and representativeness of the organisation.
Believed the election procedures established through broad consultations among member states over the past few years have: played a positive role; helped maintain institutional stability; and ensured continuity of work.
Noted that as the global health landscape continues to evolve, further improvements to procedures should follow the principles of inclusiveness, transparency, efficiency, and consensus-building.
Emphasised the importance of: respecting the intergovernmental nature of the organisation; safeguarding the equal participation rights of all member states, especially developing countries; and providing sufficient opportunities for member states to learn about candidates in an objective, orderly, and transparent manner
Supported enhancing the clarity of procedural rules; improving the predictability of timelines; and strengthening implementation of relevant codes of conduct, including norms related to campaign activities, and the use of communication platforms.

Norway(EB member)

Said the new DG will take office in a highly challenging and polarised time, including challenges electorally, financially, and globally.
Stated that the future DG must have both political acumen, as well as excellent unifying and administrative skills.
Highlighted that previous leadership experience from a large organisation would be desirable; alongside solid health experience and policy experience
Emphasised that the new DG must strive to ensure a reformed and strengthened WHO within a more unified, coordinated, and resource-efficient UN system.

Guinea (EB member)

Was grateful for financial support for travel and visit to the executive board. This is essential. It guarantees that the selection of the future Director General is based exclusively on merit, vision, and competence, not on financial ability of countries of origin of the candidates.
Emphasized transparency at regional meetings.
Called for same opportunities for all candidates to respect the principle of equality of treatment.
Sought clarity on status of internal candidates. Emphasized differentiation between work within the WHO and campaigns as essential to preserve the integrity of the organization.

Germany (non-EB)

Wants the net DG to lead WHO with accountability, transparency, and a clear vision.
Said it was imperative that campaign activities and WHO duty are clearly separated for internal candidates.
Called for conducting an evaluation once the selection process is complete, and building on the insights gained.

India (non-EB)

Attached high importance to a transparent, credible, and consensus-driven process for the election of the next DG.
Welcomed structured arrangements proposed for the candidate forums, the clear guidelines regarding campaign activities at regional sessions, and the measures outlined to maintain a clear separation between campaign activities and WHO functions for internal candidates.
Said was committed to working constructively with all partners to promote a balanced vision for global health governance, one that is typically strong, financially sustainable, and guided by the topic, equality of women.
Said that the election process must agree adhere to the WHO Board of Conduct, including technical campaigning and respect for confidentiality of voting.

Bangladesh (non-EB)

Underscored the importance of a transparent, fair, inclusive process in full conformity with the relevant rules of procedures, resolutions, and decisions of WHO.
Said the integrity and neutrality of the organization must remain at the center of the electoral process.
Extended appreciation to the incumbent Director General for his outstanding performance, believed the next Director General should also demonstrate strong technical competence, visionary leadership, commitment to multilateralism, and a deep understanding of the health priorities and challenges of developing countries.
Emphasized the importance of ensuring equal treatment of candidates and stick strict adherence to the established code of conduct relating to electoral campaign activities.

II. OPINION

The next WHO leader will need to be a multitasking political acrobat

First published in Geneva Solutions

By Priti Patnaik

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus’s successor will need a strong strategy and their political wits about them to address member state defections, shaky financial prospects and an expanding to-do list of global health issues, writes Priti Patnaik, founder of Geneva Health Files.

The World Health Organization has sounded the call that will see a slew of nominations from potential candidates to be the next leader of the organisation. A communication to this effect was sent out last month by the current director general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and recently-published guidelines for the election process will be reviewed at the World Health Assembly, the organisation’s highest decision-making body, next week.

There have been many names already doing the rounds – German politician Helge Braun and WHO Americas regional director Jarbas Barbosa, reportedly, among them. But it is still early in the process, and it would be wise to wait and see which candidates will eventually have the backing of their countries.

The election process comes at a time of falling financial support from member states. This might also translate into a lacklustre eagerness from countries to put forth their candidates. To be sure, the process can be painstaking because it will mean expending both additional financial resources and political capital. Countries will need to kick in an entire machinery for the campaign that will begin this year and culminate in the selection of the new head in May 2027.

Beyond the process itself, only those countries that have a specific vision for global health, and for the WHO, are likely to join the race to nominate the next leader. More than a few countries have their hands full at home, either due to widening security agendas or a plain disinterest in international organisations.

Unprecedented and complex geopolitical dynamics present both challenges and opportunities for interested candidates.

The tightrope on financing

A key challenge that will welcome the new leader is an altered landscape in global health and the WHO’s role in this architecture. She or he will be faced with an ongoing financial crunch, sparked by historic cuts of aid. Further, the new director general will be met with a restructured organisation with some of its key functions spliced and diced across different member states, such as Germany and France, which house the WHO Hub for Pandemic and Epidemic Intelligence and the WHO Academy, respectively.

The WHO’s workforce globally is projected to shrink by more than 20 per cent by July 2026. And yet, the new leader will have to deliver on ever-expanding mandates while staying on course for securing the core fundamentals in global health, including its convening power, setting of standards and norms, issuing guidelines and prequalification of medical products, among other areas

On financing alone, Tedros’s successor will need to make tough decisions on both efficiencies and the sources of funding. The pressure of relying on the private sector and private actors, without meaningful and adequate voluntary, unearmarked contributions from countries, is only growing.

The need for a political vision

Traditional WHO watchers believe that the problem is not the lack of finances, but the lack of political vision for the institution. Financing pressures are typically cyclical for a range of reasons, but the distinguishing feature is the political leadership that steers an organisation through uncertainty, they say.

The need for political deftness is crucial, given that the WHO may be facing its toughest test yet: the highly political and sensitive topic of its membership. Experts lament countries choosing their membership to the institution at will. Recent moves by both the US and Argentina to withdraw from the WHO raise a number of questions, not only on what this means for international health cooperation, but also on the legality of these procedures.

The central coordinating role of the WHO has always been emphasised. But what does that mean in practice, particularly in the context of a changing global health landscape as a result of funding cuts and a redrawing of domestic priorities in many donor countries? Fundamental questions are being raised for the sake of efficiency and cutting down on duplication, including mergers of institutions. The new leader must articulate her or his vision on navigating deep transitions in the field.

Despite the challenges awaiting the next director general, it is also a role with tremendous possibilities, from furthering the agenda on gender equality, to leadership in response during conflicts, to anticipating challenges and opportunities in artificial intelligence, to its work on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.

The institution deserves a humane, dynamic and courageous leader in these turbulent times, taking the baton from Tedros, who has governed during a pandemic, and in the backdrop of splintering international solidarity.

Increasingly, global health is a sphere where foreign policy unfolds. As the only member state-led institution in global health, it acts as a key interface for 190+ countries. Any new leader will have significant power in bringing regions together and in dealing with private actors.

A changing international order provides opportunities for political institutions such as the WHO. Health, after all, is political. But given that health is also intrinsically linked to other sectors, including trade, security and the environment, a leader who assesses these linkages holistically will steer the institution through these modern-day realities.

The question now will be, will member states elect the best woman or man for the job, or will they make the most convenient political choice?

Few people, if any, seriously believe that the WHO will be rescued by a shining white knight or a diva with a magic wand. A secret ballot next May will determine the new leader. People’s health globally will be shaped by who comes next. Whoever assumes this responsibility will have to make tough but wise choices, and quickly. But that is what we expect from good leaders.