The World Health Organization's International Health Regulations and the Power of its Director-General

Do you trust this man to have your best interests at heart?

 

 

If not, you should be greatly concerned about the powers that are being granted to him under the World Health Organization's International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR).  While the drafting of an WHO instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response also known as the pandemic accord/pandemic treaty gets the headline news, the redrafting of the IHR should cause us to ponder what lies ahead for all of us as this unelected body of "experts" seeks to solidify its power over the world. 

 

As background, the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) "....

 

"...provide an overarching legal framework that defines countries’ rights and obligations in handling  public health events and emergencies that have the potential to cross borders.

 

The IHR are an instrument of international law that is legally-binding on 196 countries, including the 194 WHO Member States. The IHR  grew out of the response to  deadly epidemics that once overran Europe. They create rights and obligations for countries, including the requirement to report public health events. The Regulations also  outline the criteria to determine whether or not a particular event constitutes a  “public health emergency of international concern”. 

 

At the same time, the IHR require countries to designate a National IHR Focal Point for communications with WHO, to establish and maintain core capacities for surveillance and response, including at designated points of entry. Additional provisions address the areas of  international travel and transport such as the health documents required for international traffic.

 

Finally, the IHR introduce important safeguards to protect the rights of travellers and other persons in relation to the treatment of personal data, informed consent and non-discrimination in the application of health measures under the Regulations."

  

Governments held a second meeting of the Working Group on Amendments to the IHR from February 20 to 24, 2023 during which the 307 proposed amendments to the "instrument" were discussed by the 194 Member States of WHO who are also State Partners to the IHR for the first time.  This is being done for the following reason as suggested by Dr. Ashley Bloomfield, the former Director-General of Health in New Zealand:

 

"The ongoing pandemic has underscored the importance of countries working together collaboratively, and supporting WHO in its vital work, to make the world safer. The tone of the discussions and progress made during this week’s meeting clearly show that countries understand the responsibility they have to ensure this process is successful.” 

  

Bloomfield also claims that:

"The efforts to update the International Health Regulations and draft a pandemic accord share a number of common themes, including the importance of equity in access to health, collaboration and capacity building.  It is important that there is consistency and alignment across the two processes.”.  This is being done under the guise of making the world safer from communicable diseases and ensuring equitable responses to public health threats."

 

Let's look at some key excerpts from the proposed changes to the IHR which are now under consideration in which I have highlighted the term "Director-General", Tedros Adhanom Ghebreysus'

position, thanks in no small part to the influence of Bill Gates and his billions of dollars on the WHO, noting the following:

 

The proposed amendments are presented as follows:

 

Strikethrough = proposal to delete existing text

 

Underlined and bold = proposal to add text

 

(...): existing text in the IHR (2005) in relation to which no proposals for amendments were submitted and which is therefore omitted from the compilation

  

Here are screen captures of pages 9 and 10 which outline what happens if a public health emergency of regional concern or intermediate health alert is determined to be taking place by the Director-General:

 

Basically, under the new draft of the IHR, all power to determine whether a public health emergency or an intermediate public health alert (i.e. not an emergency but an event that required heightened international awareness and potential international public health response) is occurring and the response to an emergency is ultimately dictated by one individual, the World Health Organization's Director-General.  Elected governments who are State Parties to the IHR must then follow the orders that are dictated to them by the World Health Organization.  And there went what little remains of national sovereignty.

 

So, in light of these changes to the World Health Organization's International Health Regulations, we had better learn to trust these two because they hold all of the "pandemic cards":

 

Let's close with this video from a recent tweet by Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus:

Yes indeed, meaningful and lasting changes that will give him all of the power over all of us.  It's all part of an unprecedented power grab by an organization that is increasingly proving itself to be corrupted by private money.