Lawyer Philip Kruse from Geneva June 1, 2024 reports the legal instruments WHO Pandemic Treaty and IHR will not be adopted now. There will be new discussions and attempts in the future about these legal instruments. The discussions and a new vote will be attemped later this year.
International Lawyers Press Conference on the 77th WHA, IHR Amendments + Pandemic Treaty | June 1 Also on the World Council for Health webpage.
Today in Geneva: We Are The Change Rally & March in Geneva – People from across the world gather at the United Nations in Geneva protesting against The WHO Pandemic Treaty and to declare their independence from global elites. Listen here.
Everybody keep protesting and informing of the global powergrab!
Childrens Health Defense reports: WHO Seeking ‘Way Forward’ on IHR Amendments, but a Vote Would Be Illegal, Critics Say
WHO member states on Tuesday agreed “to continue to work during the World Health Assembly … to finalize the package of amendments to the IHR (2005),” but critics argued any vote at this point would violate international law.
World Health Organization (WHO) negotiators failed to achieve consensus on the “pandemic agreement” — also known as the “pandemic treaty” — and amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005) in time for this week’s World Health Assembly, but WHO leaders are still pushing a “way forward” for both.
According to the WHO, member states on Tuesday agreed “to continue to work during the World Health Assembly … with the aim to finalize the package of amendments to the IHR (2005) [and] agree on the timing, format and process to conclude the pandemic agreement.”
However, there is confusion concerning the legal authority under which the WHO is attempting to accomplish these objectives.
The New York Times reported that negotiators failed to submit final texts of the two documents before the May 24 deadline for consideration and a vote at this year’s assembly, taking place this week in Geneva, Switzerland.
In his welcoming remarks at the World Health Assembly on Monday, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus expressed confidence that consensus on a pandemic agreement will eventually be reached — but he did not address continued efforts to reach agreement on the proposed IHR amendments.
Article 55, Section 2 of the existing IHR requires a four-month review period for amendments to the regulations.
A prominent U.K. legal expert, Sir Jeffrey Jowell of the Blackstone Chambers law firm and member of the King’s Counsel, argued that any vote to adopt the IHR amendments at the assembly this week would violate this rule and international law.
Last month, the Dutch parliament passed a resolution along similar grounds, noting that the WHO did not present a final text of the proposed IHR amendments at least four months before the World Health Assembly. The resolution asked that the Dutch government vote no on the IHR amendments on this basis.
Three resolutions were presented this week, offering a variety of proposals for continuing negotiations on the IHR amendments and “pandemic agreement.”
As of press time though, no resolutions or decisions had been adopted at the World Health Assembly, leading to questions about the legal authority under which IHR negotiations are continuing.
The WHO has said the two proposals are intended to boost preparedness for the “next pandemic.”
But critics have called the proposals a global “power grab” that threaten national sovereignty, health freedom, personal liberties and free speech while promoting risky gain-of-function research and “health passports.”
Is WHO violating its own rules?
“What the WHO is doing is really confusing,” internist Dr. Meryl Nass, founder of Door to Freedom, told The Defender.
“I have not seen any votes,” Nass said. “It seems the WHO’s PR people simply claimed they’re going to move forward with the negotiations, and somehow, a drafting group was formed to draft a document in the dark, with no media allowed in their deliberations.”
According to Devex, “Member states agreed to create a drafting group … to reconcile their differences on how to continue, and how long to extend, the [pandemic] treaty negotiations.”
“The same group is also responsible for resolving outstanding issues in proposed IHR amendments,” Devex reported.
No decision to establish a drafting group appears on the assembly’s website as of press time. However, concealed within the May 29 and May 30 agenda for the World Health Assembly are references to scheduled meetings of the “drafting group on items 13.3 and 13.4.”
According to another World Health Assembly document, item 13.3 refers to the “Working Group on Amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005)” and item 13.4 refers to the “Intergovernmental Negotiating Body to draft and negotiate a WHO convention, agreement or other international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”
As of press time, no agenda had been publicized for May 31 and June 1, but Nass said, “By the end of the meeting, there will be an attempt to push what the drafting group comes up with.”
Other legal experts suggested that the WHO may seek “back door” means of achieving its desired outcome, such as inserting clauses from the proposed “pandemic treaty” into the IHR amendments for a vote this week.
To become international law, IHR amendments require that a simple majority of WHO member states approve them. The “pandemic agreement,” by contrast, requires support from two-thirds of the World Health Assembly, as it is an international treaty.
Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., professor of international law at the University of Illinois, told The Defender the IHR amendments also can be passed “by consent,” without a vote.
“Basically, the presider gets up and says, ‘I move that this resolution be adopted by consent,’” Boyle said. “If no one says anything immediately, then the president slams the gavel down and the resolution is deemed adopted despite any requirements of majority rule or supermajority rule.”
Boyle called this “a well-known, bogus, deceptive and dangerous strategy.”
According to journalist James Roguski, “A vote may be held in committee A [a World Health Assembly committee overseeing the drafting group] on Friday evening, but another vote of the full plenary session may be held in the final Plenary Session on Saturday, June 1.”
Nass told The Defender that Committee A was “pre-existing” and “is the committee that ‘passed’ the 2022 IHR amendments without a vote.” According to Roguski, “the fraudulently adopted 2022 amendments to the IHR are scheduled to enter into force” May 31.
U.S. resolution ‘intended to obfuscate rather than illuminate’
Speaking Sunday in Geneva, New Zealand’s Sir Ashley Bloomfield, co-chair of the Working Group on Amendments to the IHR, said a draft pandemic agreement may take weeks or months to be finalized, but that efforts are underway to quickly complete negotiations on the IHR amendments prior to the end of the assembly.
According to Bloomfield, 17 articles in the proposed IHR amendments are fully approved, while another 17 still need to be finalized.
“We will put forward a draft resolution asking the assembly to continue the work this week and hoping that it will be adopted by the assembly before the week is over,” Bloomfield said.
The draft resolution Bloomfield referred to was jointly proposed by the U.S., New Zealand, France, Indonesia, Kenya and Saudi Arabia, and is one of three resolutions that groups of countries have proposed.
This resolution asks the assembly to adopt “the package of amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005)” and “calls upon States Parties and the Director-General to implement fully the amended International Health Regulations (2005).”
Writing on Substack, Nass said the resolution is an attempt at obfuscation on the part of the countries involved, noting that it is unclear and “full of references to other documents (by number),” making it “impossible to tell what it is actually asking the members to commit to.”
“Everyone reading it can see it was intended to obfuscate rather than illuminate. I doubt this document will make many friends, and I doubt it will get very far,” Nass wrote.
Separately, Nass wrote on Substack that two groups of delegates at the assembly have opposed passing a package of IHR amendments this week — a group representing international pharmaceutical manufacturers and a group of countries including Iran, Malaysia, Paraguay, Russia and Uganda.
Argentina, in turn, addressed the WHO’s violation of Article 55 of the existing IHR.
The U.S.-led resolution is the only draft resolution that addresses the IHR amendments.
Resolutions by 47 member states of the African Region and a group of countries including Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Norway and Pakistan call on the assembly to extend the mandate of the International Negotiating Body for the pandemic agreement.
According to Nass, the African draft resolution would be a positive development, as “it gives us more time to educate the people and the policymakers about the pandemic preparedness agenda,” would prevent the naming of new “wild card” negotiators and “would be time-limited.”
Nass told The Defender that African nations are under pressure, citing an article the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists published Wednesday calling for the establishment of “more pathogen research labs” in Africa. The development of such labs is a key tenet of the two WHO proposals.
Nass also noted that non-state actors, including Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance — established in 1999 by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation — and the European Union “are given the opportunity to speak” at the assembly.
‘We really should claim a victory’
One reason negotiations for both WHO proposals encountered difficulty is that “what the global south wants is entirely different than what the global north wants from this process,” Nass said.
While Nass anticipates that “some amendments will be passed, one way or another, this week,” she said, “on the whole, they will be inconsequential and will not advance the One World Government plan.”
“I think this is the definitive answer to why we really should claim a victory,” Nass wrote.
Nass said:
“Yes, it was only the first battle in what is likely to be a long war. Some may claim it was only a skirmish. But what this win took was the ability to get the message about what was in these documents to the many people in the public, to negotiators and to many of our elected officials.”
The World Health Assembly will conclude its proceedings June 1. A rally opposing the WHO’s proposals is planned for that day outside the United Nations’ Geneva offices.
Please read and help share and inform:
”Globalists Plot Worldwide Genocide via WHO Pandemic Treaty” American Geopolitical Institute Report #11 By Richard C. Cook, Co-Founder and Lead Investigator, American Geopolitical Institute (AGI)
Warning from Dr. Rima Laibov on Substack:
Outstanding and clarifying info which I have cross posted on the drrimatruthreports.substack.com. I would suggest an enlargement of the focus here, Rav.
The jabs are not about health and the clinical trials were not about either safety or efficacy. That is not so abundantly clear that it does not even require repeating. However, what does require repeating is that all of this charade and the horrifying death and suffering it has caused, and continues to cause, is at the behest of, and in keeping with, the policies, programs and intended outcomes of the Death Machine known as the UN.
WHO is a subsidiary, by the way, of the UN and all the attention spent on its obscene requirements and inputs is a distraction from the main event, the rapid onslaught of the obliteration of our rights, freedoms and choices with the coming of Agenda 2030, Bio-Digital Convergence and, even worse, the Pact for the Future.
That tyrannical nightmare is slated to be adopted by the UN General Assembly on September 23, 2024.
BUT there is a bright light at the end of this darkness: the US Congress has before it right now the Disengaging Entirely From the UN Debacle Act of 2023 (HR: 6645/ S 3428) which does just that.
I would urge you to examine this bill, the Legal Memo next to it and the Action Items at Https:preventgenocide2030.org, take the Actions yourself and then urge your readers to do the same and then share the info with their Circles of Influence.
More and more mRNA vaccines are being formulated and the Immunization Agenda specifies that by 2030, not only will ALL current vaccines be pushed into the bodies of every man, woman and child on the planet, but 500 novel vaccines will be mandates as well.
This is in complete conformity with the absolute depopulation and enslavement tyranny of this insane body.
Getting out of the whole shooting match is possible now, but will not be so for much longer.
I estimate it will take 10 million people in the US demanding the passage of this bill to make it happen.
If you would like to discuss this further, please reach out to me.
Meanwhile, I really do appreciate your intelligent work.
Dr. Rima Laibov shared: New FDA Study Reports Elevated Post-Vaccination Seizure Risk In Toddlers
Patientmakt 