WHO Furthers Effort to Establish Global Health Governance Apparatus
On Monday, the World Health Organization (WHO) released the latest draft of its controversial International Health Regulations, with the purported aim to eventually establish a global accord on how to handle future pandemics. Expert observers are continuing to express concern with the regulations, saying that they are covertly designed to take away sovereignty from countries and push contentious issues such as abortion.
Jim Roguski, a member of the Law & Activism Committee at the World Council for Health, has been closely monitoring the WHO’s activities in the wake of the “serious failures” that the organization made since the COVID pandemic broke out in 2020. On Tuesday, he joined “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” to provide an update on where the accord currently stands.
“[T]he fact that it’s not referred to as a treaty is actually very important,” he explained. “What they are setting up is an ongoing series of what they call ‘the Conference of the Parties’ that would meet pretty much forever. And the idea is they’re trying to hash out an agreement just to have an agreement so that they can pat themselves on the back and say, ‘Look what great work we did.’”
Roguski continued, “I was actually a little bit surprised that from the last version, this version got smaller by about 12 pages. And so what they’re doing is trying to reach a basic, fundamental agreement to set up a bureaucracy that would meet on an ongoing basis, year after year after year, to impose protocols that we wouldn’t have any say over the matter, much like the Framework Convention for Climate Change that was agreed to by the United Nations back in 1992 — that ongoing system of forever unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats making decisions on our behalf without our input. It’s something that’s just absolutely not acceptable.”
Roguski went on to contend that the WHO’s true goal with the global accord is to force countries to make substantial financial investments into experimental and unproven vaccines.
“The thing to realize … is that it doesn’t have any resemblance to what people would think of as health,” he pointed out. “It’s really a financial venture capital prospectus to literally get developed nations to invest money in infrastructure, in developing nations, to build out more laboratories, more testing facilities, more mRNA manufacturing facilities. … [The] Global Preparedness Monitoring Board put out a report … tracking the mRNA manufacturing plants in Africa. [W]hat they’re really looking for is not an evaluation of the mistakes that happened over the last three or four years. They’re more than doubling down. They want to build the infrastructure to do more of what they did to us over the past four years.”
As the WHO considers amendments to the accord at its planned meeting in Geneva, Switzerland next week, Roguski strongly encouraged the public to contact their representatives and urge them to reject the amendments.
“[T]here’s an 18-month period for every nation on the planet to reject the amendments that the Biden administration shoved through on May 27, 2022,” he explained. “[We] put together a page, which is rejecttheamendments.com, where people can download a letter, sign it, and just mail it to your congressmen [and] your senators. … I really want the Senate to pay attention and submit H.R. 79, or at least a copy of it in the Senate, so those amendments can still be rejected.”
“I certainly feel that the senators and members of Congress should come together, understand this issue, and realize that they need to take action because their silence is viewed as consent,” Roguski underscored. “And that is just absolutely not acceptable.”
Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.