In March the World Health Organisation has held a meeting to advance the international pandemic treaty – a legally binding instrument that will enhance its powers to target anything that it deems to be “false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation” if passed.
The WHO’s scope is vast, and its 194 member states (which account for 98% of all countries on the planet) will be required to comply with the treaty under international law if it is passed.
A WHO intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) discussed a zero draft of the pandemic treaty that was released earlier this year during this meeting, which began on February 27 and ended on March 3. Article 17 “Strengthening pandemic and public health literacy” of this zero draft empowers the WHO to target so-called misinformation and disinformation.
WHO member states are specifically instructed to “tackle false, misleading, misinformation, or disinformation, including through the promotion of international cooperation,” as well as manage “infodemics…through effective channels, including social media.” The WHO defines infodemics as “too much information, including false or misleading information, in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak.”
Furthermore, Article 16 (“Whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches at the national level”) recommends that WHO member states work with non-state actors and the private sector to carry out their treaty obligations.
As the treaty has progressed, it has faced increased political pushback from elected officials in member states in America, “with US Republican Senators recently introducing a bill that would require the treaty to be approved by two-thirds of the Senate.”
“But despite this pushback, the Biden administration committed to the international pandemic treaty on the first day of the recent WHO meeting.”
And the WHO is still debating the treaty and making plans for its future. The World Health Organization (WHO) has scheduled another meeting to discuss the treaty for April 3–6, plans to present the treaty to its decision-making body, the World Health Assembly (WHA), in May, and hopes to finalize the treaty by May 2024.
Under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution, the WHO intends to adopt the treaty through an international lawmaking process in which a group of mostly unelected diplomats votes on the treaty.
“If the treaty passes, WHO member states will be required to ‘raise financial resources for effective implementation’ of the treaty and commit to allocating at least 5% of their annual health expenditure to ‘pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and health systems recovery.’ Additionally, the treaty tells member states to commit an undisclosed amount of their gross domestic product (GDP) to ‘international cooperation and assistance on pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and health systems recovery.’ This equates to billions of dollars in annual expenditure for many WHO member states and hundreds of billions of dollars per annum for some.”
This WHO push to restrict free speech through this international pandemic treaty coincides with another WHO effort to combat “misinformation” and “disinformation” through proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005).
If approved, these proposed amendments, like the treaty, will be legally binding under international law. The amendments include provisions for the WHO to “counter misinformation and disinformation” at “the global level” and to develop member states’ capacities to gain ““leverage of communication channels to communicate the risk, countering misinformation and dis-information.”
The World Health Organization (WHO) suggested in a report released alongside proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) that it would use its new misinformation and disinformation targeting powers to go after content that could “undermine public trust in health agencies and impede public confidence in, and compliance with, governmental or WHO guidance.” It also urged “a balance between ensuring more accurate scientific information on the one hand and freedom of speech and the press on the other.”
As the WHO moves to take action against alleged misinformation and disinformation through international law, more evidence is becoming available to support the perspectives of those who have been censored by Big Tech after being accused of spreading misinformation or disinformation. This evidence includes official admissions about the Covid vaccine’s ability to prevent infections as well as growing support for the Covid origins lab leak theory.
The WHO’s attempt to limit free speech is just one part of the unelected health agency’s power grab with this treaty and the proposed IHR amendments. It is also planning to expand its surveillance powers and create global vaccine passports.
With our health minister Dr Fearne in the WHO, don’t you think that he should be updating you more about what is happening? Moreover, do you think that the Maltese government, the opposition and MEPs will challenge this treaty, considering that Dr Fearne’s position?