Peru - Vizcarra’s Vacuna-gate

Peru’s former president was among nearly 500 people who secretly received early “courtesy doses” of vaccine from China’s Sinopharm.

Former President Martin Vizcarra was among dozens of political officials and connected individuals who received doses of the Sinopharm vaccine before it was approved by regulators or available to the general public. La Republica released the list of nearly 500 people who received the vaccine that included diplomats involved in the negotiations with China, lobbyists and family members of politicians. 

Vizcarra claimed he was part of the vaccine trial when he received the vaccine last November. There are a painful number of flaws in that statement. His lying is going to further harm his reputation.

This scandal straddles the Vizcarra and Sagasti administrations and has immediate political implications. President Francisco Sagasti, who was vaccinated with the Sinopharm vaccine last week, has said he was unaware of the additional vaccine doses that had been distributed. The foreign minister resigned as she received a dose of the vaccine early. The now former minister of health, Pilar Mazzetti, admitted she received a dose of the vaccine in January after lying about it last week and proclaiming she would be among the last public officials to be vaccinated.

Other former cabinet officials under Vizcarra now claim they were not offered the vaccine. A criminal investigation is being opened into the issue.

There are three separate issues here worth addressing because we may see them in other countries: 1) Line Jumping, 2) Coverup, 3) Vaccine Kickbacks.

Line Jumping

Vizcarra and those around him used their political positions to obtain early access to the vaccine. It’s offensive given the high numbers of cases and deaths in Peru and the economic devastation that has hit the country. Clearly the officials who received the vaccine knew that they were doing something unpopular being that not a single one disclosed it and several outright lied.

In spite of these concerns, political leaders should be vaccinated early and there can be good public health benefits to presidents publicly getting the vaccine. Alberto Fernandez was vaccinated in January with the Sputnik V as a way to push back against concerns about the Russian vaccine and the process by which Argentina approved it. Pinera received China’s Sinovac vaccine (a different Chinese vaccine from the one distributed in Peru) last week. Both presidents did so publicly, with photos and videos of the event, and used it as a moment to promote their public health efforts.

Coverup

If Vizcarra had been vaccinated in November as part of the trial and disclosed it, there would have been some grumbling about line jumping, but it would not be the scandal that it is today. The real problem is that Vizcarra took the vaccine in secret as did many other Peruvian public officials. This is a scandal that fits the famous political rule of “It’s not the crime, it’s the coverup.”

Presidents should not hide their health issues or treatments. This is especially true when the health issue relates to the top political issue in the world. 

Separately, there needs to be transparency in the vaccine process. Everything Vizcarra and his allies did here violated that need for transparency. How are health authorities choosing to approve vaccines? How are the vaccine contracts negotiated and paid for? How are the vaccines distributed? How many vaccines have been delivered to the country? Who is receiving the vaccines and how has that order been chosen? Vizcarra’s actions could cause Peruvians to lose further trust in the process and harm the long term efforts to vaccinate the country.

Vaccine kickbacks

The biggest part of this scandal is how Vizcarra’s government had all the extra off-books vaccine doses in the first place. It appears that Sinopharm offered an additional 2,000 “courtesy doses” of vaccine, enough for 1,000 people, as part of the vaccine trial. They claim these doses were intended for the doctors and researchers working on the trial, something that would be odd even if the doses did not go to politicians. The doses were then managed by people on the ground who made sure the president, the cabinet and their friends and family received access.

This courtesy dose thing is a kickback. Getting undisclosed doses of a vaccine for free as part of a trial in which the vaccine's efficacy is being judged should never occur. It’s an issue that plays directly into clientilism in which a political leader can offer early vaccines to his top supporters and donors. Correctly or not, it creates the impression that Peru chose and approved this vaccine due to the company’s offer of additional off-books doses rather than the price or availability or health considerations.

The scandal in Peru should cause journalists to take a second look at their own countries’ contracts and vaccine offerings. Getting additional doses of vaccines for political leaders, donors and supporters is not quite as direct as a monetary bribe, but in many ways could be more useful in the current political climate. 

Thanks for reading

Announcement: Tomorrow afternoon I am participating in a live online debate with Intelligence Squared about Trump’s deplatforming from social media. There will be a podcast of the event distributed later. I was invited because I wrote the newsletter on “Who will be the first Latin American president kicked off Twitter?” and the Financial Times op-ed on a similar topic. Thanks to everyone who shared those articles with their friends and colleagues.

This newsletter is supported by paying subscribers who also receive additional content. Tomorrow’s newsletter for paying subscribers will include polling on Peru’s presidential election. Please consider subscribing for $9 per month.