Community News
BEHIND OUR BACKS – The World Health Organization is dangerously close to becoming the global health authority with sweeping powers over our lives
BY SIMONE J. SMITH
Picture this chilling dystopian scene for a moment…
Citizens turned into puppets of a power that dictates our health, the vaccines that we must give our children – even when they’ve been proven ineffective – and restricts our freedom to move and live freely.
Is that the world you want?
“It’s a question of ‘when’ – not ‘if’ – the next pandemic will occur. Having an agreement among governments, the WHO Member States, will make a major difference in how we respond next time. That is why we need the Pandemic Accord.” Ricardo Matute, Government of Chile Health Attaché
“Bangladesh has a huge population. We need to act together to overcome future pandemics in a better way than we did with COVID-19. This is why we need a strong Pandemic Accord.” Mohammad Kamruzzaman, Government of Bangladesh
“We clearly saw (in the response to COVID-19) there were gaps in the global health system in dealing with public health emergencies. We need to address these gaps.” Abigail White-Wilson, Government of Jamaica
The next pandemic? Who do they think they’re fooling?
Media is a business, and the entertainment value of news stories is crucial for attracting audiences. The media, especially the media here in North America has the power to both inform and distract, and striking a balance between staying informed and avoiding unnecessary distractions is a personal responsibility for media consumers. What has become evident over the last few years is that many media consumers do not take on this responsibility readily, and as a result, important issues (like the one we are about to discuss) may be overshadowed by more entertaining (Tyla Water dance) or emotionally charged content (what was happening with Palestine).
Our media outlets prioritize sensational or attention-grabbing stories to increase viewership or readership. This can lead to the underreporting of significant but less sensational events. Unfortunately, some of these less sensational events are the ones that matter to humanity the most.
We are bombarded with a constant stream of information from various sources. This overload makes it challenging for individuals to stay focused on specific issues that determine our future and the future of our children. Media consumers understandably gravitate toward news sources that align with their existing beliefs and opinions. This selective exposure unfortunately leads to a lack of awareness, or interest in events that challenge those perspectives.
As a responsible media outlet, we play a crucial role in helping the public navigate the information landscape. We want to help the community take steps to stay informed by diversifying their news sources, fact-checking information, and actively seeking out comprehensive coverage of important events.
So, what do we have for you this week? We were contacted by the CitizenGO team informing us about what has been happening behind the scenes. The World Health Organization is dangerously close to becoming the global health authority with sweeping powers over our lives. The World Health Organization (WHO) has called for member states, including CANADA to finalize their pandemic treaty and pitch in more money for “when the next pandemic strikes.”
The World Health Organization (WHO) has unveiled yet another draft of this alarming proposal aimed at becoming the primary tool for managing global health crises. They have already discussed it behind closed doors, but what is the end goal?
The Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) meeting took place this December 6th – 8th. It will uncover whether there is “sufficient” global consensus to ratify the Pandemic Accord across member states. In December 2021, at its second-ever special session, the World Health Assembly established an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.
In light of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, WHO’s 194 Member States established a process to draft and negotiate a new convention, agreement, or other international instrument on pandemic preparedness and response. This was driven by the need to ensure communities, governments, and all sectors of society – within countries and globally – are better prepared and protected, in order to prevent and respond to future pandemics. The great loss of human life, disruption to households and societies at large, and impact on development are among the factors cited by governments to support the need for lasting action to prevent a repeat of such crises.
Let’s stop here for a minute; great loss of human life; better prepared and protected. What I notice when going through the WHO website is that they are great at formulating a narrative that appears positive, but if you are paying attention, you will see that what they are doing is posturing, saying what needs to be said to put in place what works not for us, but for them.
According to WHO, at the heart of the proposed accord is the need to ensure equity in both access to the tools needed to prevent pandemics (including technologies like vaccines, personal protective equipment, information and expertise) and access to health care for all people.
Let’s be real; this isn’t about health; it’s about who holds the reins of power in times of crisis.
They claim that the new accord could represent a global commitment to work together, as an international community, to help prevent disease outbreaks from impacting individuals, communities, countries and the world in the same way as the COVID-19 pandemic did. The aim would be to:
- Build resilience to pandemics
- Support prevention, detection, and responses to outbreaks with pandemic potential
- Ensure equitable access to pandemic countermeasures
- Support global coordination through a stronger and more accountable WHO
It would be up to Member States to decide if and what compliance mechanisms would be included in the new accord on pandemic preparedness and response. It is a general principle of international law that once an international law instrument is in force, it would be binding on the parties to it, and would have to be performed by those parties in “good faith.” This ultimately leaves our health decisions in the hands of our government. Is this something that we really want?
The latest draft includes overreaching proposals that extend far beyond simple ‘health management.’ Key changes include:
Expansive Definition of ‘Party’ – the term now extends beyond states, potentially diluting national sovereignty.
(g) “Party” means a State or regional economic integration organization that has consented to be bound by this Agreement, in accordance with its terms, and for which this Agreement is in force.
Permanent Funding Mechanism – This proposal would institutionalize financial support for the treaty’s mechanisms.
Centralized Health Policy Management – The WHO would gain significant authority over global health governance, overshadowing member states’ autonomy.
WHO Autonomy in Declaring Pandemics – The Director-General could independently declare pandemic status, impacting economies and civil liberties.
Combatting ‘False’ Information – Vague provisions could lead to restrictions on freedom of expression under the guise of controlling disease spread.
Gone is the “full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons” (see below):
Article 3 Principles
- The implementation of these Regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities of the States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development.
And yes … it’s also LEGALLY BINDING now!
I hope you agree this is not about health but about who holds the reins of power in times of crisis. We simply won’t let an unelected body dictate our health, impose ineffective vaccines on our children, and restrict our freedom of movement and liberty.
Or will we…