GENEVA – The World Health Organization (WHO) has admitted that it has been unable to roll out its controversial pandemic-related treaty that critics say would increase the organization’s powers in case of another international health crisis.
Critics in the United States had long warned the pandemic treaty would undermine U.S. sovereignty on important health decisions.
Worthy News already reported ahead of a WHO gathering that there was outrage about the plan within the recently elected new parliament of the Netherlands, which played a vital role in the treaty.
Legislator Fleur Agema of the Dutch anti-Islam Party for Freedom (PVV), which won parliamentary elections in November, was among the most against a pandemic treaty. “It looks like this treaty is a directive. Richer countries, such as the Netherlands, will have to give money to poorer nations to ensure their pandemic preparedness is in order, while we do not even have it in order ourselves,” she stressed.
Many Dutch legislators shared their views. Yet despite being part of a caretaker government, Dutch Health Minister Pia Dijkstra refused to back down, saying the Netherlands, as one of the critical co-initiators of the accord, would back the pandemic treaty anyway.
She said the Netherlands is “an international leader when it comes to international cooperation in the field of public health,” and there is “consensus” in the European Union on this issue.
However, without a clear mandate behind her and other officials raising concerns, WHO leaders say they have been unable to reach a consensus on the treaty at the World Health Assembly, the 194-member body governing the WHO.
HEALTH REGULATIONS
The International Health Regulations and the signing of what is now called the “WHO Pandemic Agreement” had been prepared for some two years.
Although the WHO watered down some provisions of its pandemic agreement, the amendments and agreement would give the organization sweeping powers before and during pandemics “to dictate the actions of national governments,” critics said.
The current version of the agreement would enable the WHO to take 10 percent of a country’s “pandemic-related health products” and to force the sale of another 10 percent of such products at “affordable prices.”
The agreement also requires parties to make “annual monetary contributions,” but it does not specify terms, conditions, or amounts.
Additionally, the document contemplates the forced licensing of technology, commits countries to a radical “One Health approach” covering all forms of life, and prohibits “national stockpiles of pandemic-related health products that unnecessarily exceed the quantities anticipated to be needed for domestic pandemic preparedness and response.”
A signatory to the agreement must “set aside a portion of its total procurement of relevant diagnostics, therapeutics, or vaccines in a timely manner for use in counties facing challenges in meeting public health needs and demand.”
The agreement, which has open-ended language, is intended to work in conjunction with the International Health Regulations regarding “public health surveillance.”
SEVERAL PROPOSALS
Amid pressure, several proposals that would have given the WHO the power to issue binding directives to member states have been dropped.
However, experts say significant issues remain, such as the affirmation of the WHO as “the directing and coordinating authority on international health work, including on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”
Proposals that critics said aimed to construct a “global censorship” and “information control” operation led by the WHO were also dropped, but the texts still commit member states to enhance their abilities to counter “misinformation and disinformation,” which in practice have meant silencing critical media outlets, Worthy News learned.
However, the WHO has defended the pandemic treaty, saying, among other things, that “member states are primarily responsible for the health of their citizens” and that its role will be limited to being “the directing and coordinating authority on international cooperation around health work.”
The failure to gain approval for the measure comes as WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus came as 194 member states were wrapping up the May 27-June 1 World Health Assembly in Geneva.
“WHO Member States have ended intensive negotiations aimed at strengthening global capacities to respond to future pandemics and outbreaks in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and agreed to submit outcomes of their work for consideration by the upcoming World Health Assembly,” the WHO confirmed.
Yet, negotiators failed to produce a draft deal for approval at this week’s convention.
