The World Health Organization (WHO) has been actively seeking to “transform” its mandate since 2017, and has undertaken amendments to legally binding International Health Regulations (IHR) to do so.
Independent researcher James Roguski has been closely monitoring the WHO and its decision-making body, the World Health Assembly (WHA), in what he refers to as a sidestepping of due process to ram through the IHR without fair and due notice to member states.
“Quite frankly there's a lot of arguing going on in these negotiations,” explains Roguski. “The World Health Assembly are the delegates from all of the many nations, and they are very unhappy with the World Health Organization.”
In the amendments to the regulations that they have been so secretive about for a year plus now, they have a deadline of January 27th, that they are obligated because of Article 55 to submit a final version four months in advance of the May meeting.
Back in October, they said they were not going to meet the deadline. I think that is spectacular news, because if they don't submit it four months in advance, they don't get to make any changes in their May meeting.
And I feel that would be an enormous victory.
However, in May 2022, the group abstained from voting altogether, and the attendance fell short of the necessary quorum to proceed with a vote.
According to rule 85 of the WHO's “Basic Documents” the, “presence of a majority of a committee shall, however, be required for a question to be put to a vote.”
The amendments were approved by a WHO committee in a sparsely-attended meeting on May 27, without a vote, which Roguski calls a conspiracy to violate international law.
“They are actively conspiring to break the rules, break Article 55,” Roguski says. “They've scheduled meetings for February and April, and they have said to forget about the four-month rule, that they're just going to keep negotiating right up to the last minute and submit a document that nobody's really had a chance to see.”
Roguski also points out that the assembly claims to have voted on the adoption of the amendments, but if you watch the video, no such vote took place.
“They lied and committed voting fraud,” says Roguski.
This prompted 12 members of the European Parliament to send a letter to the director-general of the WHO, Tedros Ghebreyesus, requesting he send evidence of a vote, as well as the exact number of members present at the vote.
The European MPs gave Tedros 48 hours to send proof of a vote, and, if such was not produced, the signatories would declare the amendments null and void.
No response was received. So Rebel News inquired with the WHO to request proof of a recorded vote on the IHR amendments from the May 28, 2022, World Health Assembly meeting.
Daniel Eipstenn, a WHA media relations spokesperson, responded with the organization's Resolutions and Decisions Annex document that detailed an “adoption” of the amendments. Still, there was no evidence provided that a vote ever took place.
To confirm this, video recordings of the WHA happenings show that no vote ever took place.
“When you shine a light on cockroaches or rats, they tend to run for the darkness,” says Roguski. “Any discussion of any of this is something that they do not really like.”
“They want to keep all of these negotiations in secret,” he asserts. “They ideally would have gone through this whole process, adopt it, put it into play, let the period of time to reject it go past, and then down the road when it's too late and they start implementing these rules and everybody goes, ‘hey, what are you doing?’ They say, ‘oh, well, we had this long period of time for you to say something and you didn't say anything.’ And so that's why I'm speaking up now because your silence is viewed as consent.”
Roguski urges Canadians to get involved by signing a petition sponsored by Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis, brought forward by Burnaby, British Columbia resident Doug Porter to exit the WHO and UN completely.
“When you're in a relationship where the other party is lying and committing fraud and conspiring to violate international law, you can try to negotiate for better terms or you could leave that relationship,” Roguski states. “And that's what I think the world needs to look at with these organizations. They are not serving the people, they are serving themselves and their masters.”
Director-General Tedros would have you believe this is all fake news.
Yet his own organization has failed to provide evidence of a vote on matters of great public importance, prompting increased skepticism around accountability and due process.