The World Health Organization (WHO) is advancing its plan that would see the unelected United Nations health body receive sweeping new powers to censor so-called “disinformation” under global law.
This week, the WHO held a meeting to advance the “international pandemic treaty.”
Once passed, the treaty is a “legally binding” instrument that will enhance the WHO’s powers to target anything that it deems to be “false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation.”
The scope of the WHO is vast and its 194 member states will have to comply with the treaty under the new international law.
WHO member states account for 98% of all the countries in the world.
The move will surrender America’s pandemic authority to the Chinese Communist Party-linked WHO and allow the global agency to override Americans’ constitutional rights under international law.
This meeting began on February 27 and ended on March 3.
During the meeting, a WHO intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) discussed a zero draft of the pandemic treaty that was released earlier this year.
This zero draft empowers the WHO to target so-called “misinformation” and “disinformation” via Article 17 (“Strengthening pandemic and public health literacy”) of the treaty.
Specifically, WHO member states are instructed to “tackle false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation, including through promotion of international cooperation” and manage “infodemics…through effective channels, including social media.”
Infodemics is a term that the WHO uses to describe “too much information including false or misleading information in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak.”
Additionally, Article 16 (“Whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches at the national level”) recommends that WHO member states collaborate with unelected non-state actors and the private sector when carrying out their obligations under the treaty.
As the treaty has progressed, it has faced increased political pushback from elected officials in member states.
Republican senators recently introduced 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.
Biden insists that the treaty should be passed without congressional approval.
Meanwhile, the WHO is continuing to discuss the treaty and plan for its future.
The global health agency has another meeting to discuss the treaty scheduled for April 3 to April 6.
It plans to present the treaty to its decision-making body, the World Health Assembly (WHA), in May.
The United Nations body hopes to finalize the treaty by May 2024.
Excellent discussion with Klaus Schwab, Founder & Executive Chairman of @wef, about how we can join forces to accelerate progress in health & development to deliver the @GlobalGoalsUN. I look forward to continuing our discussions with partners @Davos. #WEF20 #HealthForAll pic.twitter.com/nhH2TMo0sV
— Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (@DrTedros) November 15, 2019
The WHO intends to adopt the treaty under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution through an international lawmaking process.
The process involved a group of mostly unelected diplomats voting 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.
However, in the name of so-called “equity,” this means hundreds of billions of dollars per annum for some nations.
This WHO push to crack down on speech via this international pandemic treaty is being made in tandem with another WHO effort that targets “misinformation” and “disinformation.”
The organization is also pushing proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005).
Like the treaty, these proposed amendments will be legally binding under international law if finalized.
The amendments include provisions for the WHO to “counter misinformation and disinformation” at “the global level.”
They will also develop member states’ capacities to gain “leverage of communication channels to communicate the risk, countering misinformation and disinformation.”
In a report that was released alongside the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR), the WHO suggested it would use its new “misinformation” and “disinformation” targeting powers to censor information that could “undermine public trust in health agencies and impede public confidence in, and compliance with, governmental or WHO guidance.”
It also called for “a balance between ensuring more accurate scientific information on one hand and freedom of speech and the press on the other.”
As the WHO is adamant that it must be able to take action against alleged “misinformation” and “disinformation” via international law that overrides the national laws of once-sovereign countries.
However, more evidence is now emerging that supports the perspectives of those who were censored by Big Tech after being accused of spreading “misinformation” or “disinformation.”
While many were censored by tech platforms for making these claims, the WHO was allowed to freely promote false claims from the Chinese Communist Party that there was “no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission” of the coronavirus.
Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China🇨🇳. pic.twitter.com/Fnl5P877VG
— World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) January 14, 2020
The WHO’s attempt to curb speech is just one part of the power grab the unelected health agency is vying for with this treaty and the proposed IHR amendments.