Russia hopes to supply Philippines with ‘Sputnik-V’ COVID-19 vaccine by year’s end

1 / 2
Russia's "Sputnik-V" vaccine against COVID-19 will soon be made available in the Philippines. (REUTERS/Tatyana Makeyeva)
2 / 2
Russia's "Sputnik-V" vaccine against COVID-19 will soon be made available in the Philippines. (REUTERS/Tatyana Makeyeva)
Short Url
Updated 15 October 2020
Follow

Russia hopes to supply Philippines with ‘Sputnik-V’ COVID-19 vaccine by year’s end

  • If joint clinical trials are successful, Russia wants to share its technology with the Philippines and start local production of the Sputnik V vaccine
  • President Rodrigo Duterte says the Philippines plans to inoculate its entire 113 million population against the coronavirus

MANILA: Moscow hopes to supply the Philippines with the Russian COVID-19 vaccine by the year’s end if joint clinical trials prove successful, Russia’s ambassador to Manila, Igor Khovaev, told Arab News.

Touted as the world’s first, the Russian COVID-19 vaccine, known by the tradename Sputnik V, was registered by the Russian Ministry of Health in August and approved for distribution in Russia despite international criticism that it had only been tested in a small number of people during Phase 1-2 trials. The Phase 3 trial has yet to be conducted.

“We hope to launch these trials this November. We hope so. We Russians, we are ready to move forward as fast as it’s acceptable for the Philippine side,” Khovaev told Arab News in an exclusive interview earlier this week.

“If the results of (the) joint clinical trials Phase 3 are positive, the supply of Russian vaccine (in the Philippines) can start by the end of this year,” he said, adding that the Philippines and Russia are also in talks for a potential bilateral partnership in the local production of the vaccine.

“I believe that we are on the right track. Everything is now under consideration in the (Philippine) Department of Science and Technology (DOST). So, we maintain close contacts with your DOST, and DOST also maintains close contact with the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), the only Russian state-run institution which is responsible for distribution and production of the Russian vaccine,” the ambassador said.

“We provided your DOST with a bulk of information about the results of those clinical trials ... As for the final Phase 3, these trials should be conducted here on Philippines soil,” Khovaev said.

“It’s important because we fully understand that there are some people who can have doubts regarding the safety and efficiency of the Russian vaccine. And we believe that the best way to get rid of these doubts is to do joint clinical trials.”

According to the ambassador, the DOST had assured Russia that there would be at least 1,000 Filipino volunteers for the joint Phase 3 tests.

“If everything is OK, then after that we’ll be able to start discussing joint manufacturing. Because we are ready to share our technology with you Filipinos,” the envoy said.

In September, the DOST engaged with RDIF Senior Vice President Alexander Zhuravlev, who presented the Sputnik V vaccine to Philippine officials. Russia and the Philippines have already agreed to conduct the vaccine’s Phase 3 clinical trials, which were initially expected to take place from October 2020 to March 2021.

In a televised address on Wednesday night, President Rodrigo Duterte said that the Philippines would likely source COVID-19 vaccines from Russia and China, both of which had submitted applications to conduct clinical trials in the country.

He added that he wanted all 113 million Philippine citizens to be immunized against the disease.

As of Thursday, nearly 348,700 COVID-19 cases had been recorded in the Philippines, with 6,497 related deaths.

“All should have the vaccine without exception,” Duterte said, adding that Russia had pledged to build a pharmaceutical facility in the country.

Before the address, the president met Khovaev, who is soon ending his over five-year term in the Philippines.

“I just had a talk with the ambassador of Russia, the outgoing, and we had a serious one-on-one talk and they said that Russia is coming in,” Duterte said.

“They want to establish a pharmaceutical plant and their vaccine will also be made here.”


US judge orders curbs on immigration agents’ tactics toward Minnesota protesters

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

US judge orders curbs on immigration agents’ tactics toward Minnesota protesters

  • Arrests and tear-gassing of peaceful demonstrators prohibited
  • Observers also protected from arrests, crowd-control munitions
MINNEAPOLIS: A federal judge in Minnesota on Friday ordered that US immigration agents deployed en masse to Minneapolis be restricted in some of the tactics they have taken against peaceful demonstrators and observers, including arrests and tear-gassing.
Handing a victory to local activists in Minnesota’s most populous city, US District Judge Kate Menendez issued an injunction barring federal agents from retaliating against individuals engaged in non-violent, unobstructive protest activity.
The ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed against the US Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies on December 17, three weeks before an immigration agent fatally shot Renee Good, a 37-year-old woman in Minneapolis, spawning waves of protests and putting the city on edge.
The court case was brought on behalf of six protesters and observers who claimed their constitutional rights had been infringed by the actions of ICE agents.
The ‌83-page order explicitly ‌prohibits federal officers from detaining people who are peacefully protesting or merely observing the ‌officers, ⁠unless there is ‌reasonable suspicion that they are interfering with law enforcement or have committed a crime.
Federal agents also are banned from using pepper spray, tear gas or other crowd-control munitions against peaceful demonstrators or bystanders observing and recording the immigration enforcement operations, the judge ruled.
Menendez wrote that the government, in defending the street tactics of its immigration officers, had failed to “explain why it is necessary for them to arrest and use force against peaceful observers.”
Stopping or detaining drivers and passengers in vehicles when there is no reason to believe they are forcibly obstructing or interfering with federal agents is likewise prohibited, according to the court ⁠order.
Order comes amid heightened tensions
“There may be ample suspicion to stop cars, and even arrest drivers, engaged in dangerous conduct while following immigration enforcement officers, but ‌that does not justify stops of cars not breaking the law,” Menendez ‍wrote.
The DHS did not immediately respond to a ‍Reuters request for comment.
The ruling comes nearly two weeks after the Trump administration announced it was sending 2,000 immigration ‍agents to the Minneapolis area, bolstering an earlier deployment in what the DHS called its largest such operation in history.
The surge in heavily armed officers from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency and Border Patrol has since grown to nearly 3,000, dwarfing the ranks of local police officers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Tensions over the deployment have mounted considerably since an ICE agent fatally shot Good, a mother of three, behind the wheel of her car on January 7.
At the time, Good was taking part in one of numerous neighborhood ⁠patrols organized by local activists to track and monitor ICE activities.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, one of the federal officials named in the lawsuit, said after the shooting that Good had been “stalking and impeding” ICE agents all day and had committed an act of “domestic terrorism” by trying to run over federal officers.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and local activists disputed Noem’s account, saying Good posed no physical threat to ICE agents. They pointed to video clips of the incident they said showed that Good was trying to drive her car away from officers and that the use of lethal force against her was unjustified.
Frey and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz have repeatedly demanded that the Trump administration withdraw the immigration agents, asserting that the operation is being conducted in a reckless manner endangering the public.
While largely siding with the plaintiffs in the case, the judge did not grant all their requests, declining to ban the federal government from actions not specifically taken against those who ‌filed suit. She also limited the injunction to officers deployed in the Twin Cities, rather than extending it statewide.