The COVID-19 pandemic laid bare the limitations of existing global health governance, revealing fragmented coordination, inequitable resource distribution, and the structural weaknesses of legal instruments like the International Health Regulations (IHR). In response, a range of institutional reviews—including those by the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response, the Review Committee on the IHR, the Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee for the WHO Health Emergencies Programme, and the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board—have proposed reforms to strengthen preparedness and accountability. This chapter critically synthesizes those reports alongside academic debates on international legal compliance and the regulation of transnational public-private partnerships. It situates these developments concerning the WHO Pandemic Agreement adopted in May 2025, highlighting its normative aspirations and geopolitical constraints. Beyond institutional reforms, the chapter advances a central argument: meaningful transformation in pandemic governance requires an epistemological shift. Specifically, it calls for rethinking global health not merely as a matter of state sovereignty and emergency containment but through a framework grounded in ethical principles such as transnational solidarity, the One Health paradigm, and equity, especially for the most vulnerable. The chapter interrogates how such a shift challenges existing regimes’ anthropocentric, state-centric assumptions and opens space for more inclusive and equitable global cooperation. By bridging policy analysis with normative critique, the chapter contributes to reimagining global health governance as a site of ongoing contestation, where legal instruments are not an endpoint but are conceptual tools shaped by normative commitments and informing epistemic transitions.