A rising chorus of voices, including many in elected government, are expressing caution or opposition to a proposed World Health Organization pandemic agreement.The sixth gathering of the Working Group on Amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) took place December 7 and 8. The last publicly available negotiating text was released October 30.A WHO news release said the negotiations followed sessions that ran from November 6 to 10 and December 4 to 6 under a backdrop of suspicion.“During the meeting, the challenge posed by the torrent of fake news and disinformation and misinformation, directed at the pandemic agreement negotiations, was raised by the WHO Director-General, including on the false claim that any agreement would result in countries ceding sovereignty to WHO,” the WHO explained.Others insist the threats to sovereignty are quite real.Slovakia Prime Minister Robert Fico said in a speech on November 17 his country "will not support strengthening the powers of the WHO at the expense of sovereign states in managing the fight against pandemics."A coalition of three parties in New Zealand insist strict conditions must be met before its country signs on.A “national interest test” proposed by the National Party, ACT and NZ First, must be met before they will endorse “agreements from the UN and its agencies that limit national decision-making and reconfirm that New Zealand's domestic law holds primacy over any international agreements.”New Zealanders offered public submissions on the pandemic treaty that concluded August 11 2022. A summary said some citizens did not want "New Zealand to relinquish control of our domestic decision-making processes during a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) to the WHO, or otherwise reduce autonomy at the individual or country level.”The summary added, “Some submissions raised concerns about the effectiveness and accountability of the WHO, including criticisms of the Organization and its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.”In Estonia, 11 MPs wrote a letter to denounce the IHR amendments and proposed instruments. According to the Epoch Times, another 11 MPs of EU countries have also expressed their disapproval.In South Africa, two MPs have championed the “WHO Withdrawl Bill” that makes the following assertions verbatim.●The sovereignty of South Africa is of paramount importance;● South Africa must be protected from WHO influenced and UN enforced sanctions;● Dependent on funding, the WHO is a conduit for corporate colonisation and censorship;● The 47 nation African bloc, at the World Health Assembly 75, rejected the WHO’s legislative tactics that threaten national sovereignty;● The WHO’s Constitution does not contain a withdrawal provision, which violates national self-determination….●The WHO is riddled with conflicts of interest through donor funding;● The WHO failed through contradictory recommendations during COVID-19;● Africa survived COVID-19 relatively well;● There is evidence actual or fraudulent pandemics and other schemes transfer wealth from the poor and working class to billionaires and corporates, enabled by the WHO’s support for profiteering;● The WHO, through member state/delegates, is attempting a power grab through controversial amendments to the International Health Regulations and a proposed new pandemic treaty or accord that will be legally binding, and subject Africa to IMF, World Bank and other loans. In the Philippines, a parliamentary bill to opt out of the pandemic agreement was approved. Rep. Fernandez, who introduced the bill, notified the WHO, “We are writing to inform you that we hereby reject in toto the amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations … that were adopted by the 75th World Health Assembly on 27 May 2022.”The letter also complained a WHO investigation into worldwide excess deaths into recent years would not wrap up before the agreement was to be signed.“This congressional inquiry may still not be completed by the 77th World Health Assembly at the end of May 2024, which is the target date for the adoption of the substantial 300+ IHR amendments,” Diverse groups in Australia have joined together for a people's letter to denounce the IHR amendments. Although the Australian Labor government supports the WHO, a few Australian senators wish to withdraw from the body."Australia should reject the pandemic treaty. It should reject these amendments to the international health regulations and Australia should immediately withdraw from the World Health Organisation,” South Australian Liberal Senator Alex Antic remarked.In the US, Congressman Andy Biggs introduced Bill HR79, WHO Withdrawl Act on January 9 2023. It was cosponsored by 53 Republicans. However, an assessment by GovTrackUS estimates the legislation only has a 3% chance of getting past committee and 1% chance of being enacted.At WHO, the International Negotiating Body established four drafting subgroups and asked them to propose text for their respective articles by January 15 2024. They will be considered at the eighth INB meeting February 19 to March 1 2024, which will be followed with a ninth meeting March 18 to 28 2024.
A rising chorus of voices, including many in elected government, are expressing caution or opposition to a proposed World Health Organization pandemic agreement.The sixth gathering of the Working Group on Amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) took place December 7 and 8. The last publicly available negotiating text was released October 30.A WHO news release said the negotiations followed sessions that ran from November 6 to 10 and December 4 to 6 under a backdrop of suspicion.“During the meeting, the challenge posed by the torrent of fake news and disinformation and misinformation, directed at the pandemic agreement negotiations, was raised by the WHO Director-General, including on the false claim that any agreement would result in countries ceding sovereignty to WHO,” the WHO explained.Others insist the threats to sovereignty are quite real.Slovakia Prime Minister Robert Fico said in a speech on November 17 his country "will not support strengthening the powers of the WHO at the expense of sovereign states in managing the fight against pandemics."A coalition of three parties in New Zealand insist strict conditions must be met before its country signs on.A “national interest test” proposed by the National Party, ACT and NZ First, must be met before they will endorse “agreements from the UN and its agencies that limit national decision-making and reconfirm that New Zealand's domestic law holds primacy over any international agreements.”New Zealanders offered public submissions on the pandemic treaty that concluded August 11 2022. A summary said some citizens did not want "New Zealand to relinquish control of our domestic decision-making processes during a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) to the WHO, or otherwise reduce autonomy at the individual or country level.”The summary added, “Some submissions raised concerns about the effectiveness and accountability of the WHO, including criticisms of the Organization and its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.”In Estonia, 11 MPs wrote a letter to denounce the IHR amendments and proposed instruments. According to the Epoch Times, another 11 MPs of EU countries have also expressed their disapproval.In South Africa, two MPs have championed the “WHO Withdrawl Bill” that makes the following assertions verbatim.●The sovereignty of South Africa is of paramount importance;● South Africa must be protected from WHO influenced and UN enforced sanctions;● Dependent on funding, the WHO is a conduit for corporate colonisation and censorship;● The 47 nation African bloc, at the World Health Assembly 75, rejected the WHO’s legislative tactics that threaten national sovereignty;● The WHO’s Constitution does not contain a withdrawal provision, which violates national self-determination….●The WHO is riddled with conflicts of interest through donor funding;● The WHO failed through contradictory recommendations during COVID-19;● Africa survived COVID-19 relatively well;● There is evidence actual or fraudulent pandemics and other schemes transfer wealth from the poor and working class to billionaires and corporates, enabled by the WHO’s support for profiteering;● The WHO, through member state/delegates, is attempting a power grab through controversial amendments to the International Health Regulations and a proposed new pandemic treaty or accord that will be legally binding, and subject Africa to IMF, World Bank and other loans. In the Philippines, a parliamentary bill to opt out of the pandemic agreement was approved. Rep. Fernandez, who introduced the bill, notified the WHO, “We are writing to inform you that we hereby reject in toto the amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations … that were adopted by the 75th World Health Assembly on 27 May 2022.”The letter also complained a WHO investigation into worldwide excess deaths into recent years would not wrap up before the agreement was to be signed.“This congressional inquiry may still not be completed by the 77th World Health Assembly at the end of May 2024, which is the target date for the adoption of the substantial 300+ IHR amendments,” Diverse groups in Australia have joined together for a people's letter to denounce the IHR amendments. Although the Australian Labor government supports the WHO, a few Australian senators wish to withdraw from the body."Australia should reject the pandemic treaty. It should reject these amendments to the international health regulations and Australia should immediately withdraw from the World Health Organisation,” South Australian Liberal Senator Alex Antic remarked.In the US, Congressman Andy Biggs introduced Bill HR79, WHO Withdrawl Act on January 9 2023. It was cosponsored by 53 Republicans. However, an assessment by GovTrackUS estimates the legislation only has a 3% chance of getting past committee and 1% chance of being enacted.At WHO, the International Negotiating Body established four drafting subgroups and asked them to propose text for their respective articles by January 15 2024. They will be considered at the eighth INB meeting February 19 to March 1 2024, which will be followed with a ninth meeting March 18 to 28 2024.
