Panel 2 - WHO and legal aspects - discussion

The International Health Regulations (IHR) were first adopted by the WHO World Health Assembly in 1969. A major revision and update of the regulations took place in 2005 and came into effect on June 15, 2007. Neither of the documents, the original regulations adopted in 1969, nor the subsequent update, wereratified by the parliaments of member states, they were adopted and came into force by decision of the World Health Assembly, WHO's highest decision-making body, which consists of representatives of all member states. In accordance with WHO procedures, the adoption of these laws did not require additional ratification at the national level (with an opt-out procedure where any member state can raise objections within a specified period). The IHR is legally binding on 196 countries, making it one of WHO's most important tools for managing global health crises. The goal of the IHR 2005 is to prevent, protect against, control and respond to the international spread of diseases that may pose a threat to public health, while avoiding unnecessary disruption of international traffic and trade. In light of this legislation, member states are required to develop and maintain the capacity to detect, assess, report and respond to health events that may affect public health.
Just how much of an impact these regulations can have on people's lives is shown by Article 31 of the Health Regulations of 2005, “Health Measures for the Entry of Travelers,” which stipulates in the second paragraph that if a traveler who may be required by any state to undergo a medical examination, immunization or other prophylactic treatment, does not consent to such a measure or refuses to provide information or documents, the country concerned may refuse entry to that traveler, and if there is evidence of an imminent threat to public health, may compel the traveler to undergo a medical examination, vaccination or other prophylaxis, including isolation, quarantine or subjecting the traveler to public health observation.
This article was the driving force behind covidian restrictions around the world during the Covid-19 pandemic, it was the driving force behind the introduction of widespread PCR testing as a reliable diagnostic method for determining whether someone is sick and a potential threat to other people, which drove pandemic statistics, allowing the introduction of more and more restrictions, orders and bans, and a fast-track authorization for experimental vaccines, but which did not stop infection and did not stop transmission of the virus.

WHO in the COVID-19 pandemic
One of the consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic was a decision by the WHO Executive Council to consider changes to the existing version of the IHR and a proposal to develop a new pandemic treaty. Underlying this idea “is the issue of strengthening global preparedness and response capacity to public health emergencies”. But the WHO has never taken stock of the gains and losses of its pandemic response efforts. The desire to strengthen preparedness and response capacity should come from an analysis that would prove the ineffectiveness of the actions taken, which were based on identical assumptions around the world - in line with WHO recommendations.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO proved its incompetence. It abandoned the use of safe and proven drugs - during the pandemic, treatment protocols proposed by many doctors using existing retargeted drugs (ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine) were labeled by the WHO as unacceptable experimental therapies, while vaccination with an experimental mRNA preparation that had never before been used in humans, became a global treatment regimen, despite the fact that the vaccinators were not aware that studies on the efficacy and safety of vaccines were not completed, the issues of carcinogenicity, safety of vaccination in pregnant and lactating women or children were unknown, so there could be no “informed consent.”
WHO ignored the experience of GPs, disregarded evidence from low-, middle- and high-income countries. The lowest-income countries recorded 44,900 deaths attributed to Covid-19, while middle- and high-income countries totaled nearly 6 million deaths. The WHO has also ignored the huge number of adverse reactions in its own database and has not issued warnings about gene vaccines.
In March 2021, “World leaders unite in urgent call for international pandemic treaty: The 25 heads of government and international agencies are calling together to sign a new treaty that will signal the high-level political action needed to protect the world from future health crises. More pandemics and other serious health threats will emerge. No single government or multilateral agency can face this threat alone. The question is not if, but when."
In July 2021, the UN General Assembly hosts an Independent Panel on Pandemic Preparedness and Response, which recommends the development of a new treaty, “a new framework pandemic convention that should, among other things, fill gaps in the current legal system and clarify the responsibilities of states and international actors. Such a pandemic treaty or framework convention would give states parties the opportunity to commit to the principles of pandemic preparedness and response in a spirit of mutual obligation, and would provide a framework for the institutional architecture needed to prevent future pandemics."
The panel recommended “enhancing WHO's authority and independence, including by ensuring that it is adequately, predictably, flexibly and sustainably funded, and making it so that in the future the director-general and regional directors are elected for a single seven-year term. A much improved disease surveillance and warning system is needed. The WHO must have the authority to quickly investigate disease outbreaks of concern and quickly publish information on its own."