WHO IHR Modifications Were Illegally Approved ⋆ Brownstone Institute

In blatant disregard for established protocol and procedures, sweeping IHR amendments were prepared behind closed doors, and then both were submitted for consideration and accepted by the World Health Assembly quite literally in the last moments of a meeting that stretched late into Saturday night, the last day of the meeting schedule.

Although the "Article 55" rules and regulations for amending the IHR explicitly require that "The text of any proposed amendment shall be communicated to all States Parties by the Director-General at least four months before the Health Assembly at which it is proposed for consideration," the requirement of four months for review was disregarded in a rush to produce some tangible deliverable from the Assembly.

The hastily approved IHR consolidates virtually unchecked authority and power of the Director-General to declare public health emergencies and pandemics as he/she may choose to define them, and thereby to trigger and guide the allocation of global resources as well as a wide range of public health actions and guidances.

These activities include recommendations relating to "Persons, baggage, cargo, containers, conveyances, goods and postal parcels," but based on earlier draft language of proposed IHR amendments and the WHO pandemic "Accord" are likely to extend to both invasive national surveillance and mandated public health "Interventions" such as vaccines and non-pharmaceutical interventions such as social distancing and lockdowns.

The approved amendments redefine the definition of a "Pandemic Emergency;" include a newly added emphasis on "Equity and solidarity;" direct that independent Nations shall assist each other to support local production capacity for research, development, and manufacturing of health products; that equitable access to relevant health products for public health emergencies including pandemics shall be facilitated; and that developed nations shall make available "Relevant terms of their research and development agreements for relevant health products related to promoting equitable access to such products during a public health emergency of international concern, including a pandemic emergency."

The IHR does not acknowledge the diversity of opinion surrounding what are considered sound and valid "Scientific principles" or "Scientific evidence," and there is no indication that the World Health Assembly or the WHO recognizes how readily "Scientific principles" and "Scientific evidence" were manipulated or otherwise biased during prior public health crises, and the likelihood that this will continue to happen on a regular basis unless reforms designed to respect diversity of opinion and interpretation are implemented.

Each State Party shall designate or establish, in accordance with its national law and context, one or two entities to serve as National IHR Authority and a National IHR Focal Point, as well as the authorities responsible within its respective jurisdiction for the implementation of health measures under these Regulations. 

https://brownstone.org/articles/who-ihr-modifications-were-illegally-approved/