Declaration of Opposition to the Proposed International Health Regulations Amendments TAKE ACTION NOW!
We, the undersigned, oppose the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR), an attempt to implement the public health equivalent of a “one-world government” in violation of individual nations’ and citizens’ inalienable rights and sovereignty.
Please amplify your voice by emailing or calling your president, prime minister, members of parliament, senators, representatives, and other public servants to respectfully request that they sign the declaration and oppose the IHR amendments. You can find phone numbers and email contacts by searching on the internet.
We, the undersigned, oppose the proposed amendments to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) existing 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) and stand in support of all people’s right to health sovereignty and self-determination.
The United States’ proposed amendments to the IHR are set to be considered at the 75th World Health Assembly, which begins on the 22nd of May, 2022. The proposed amendments, however, create an ambiguity relating to the date they become effective as the proposed amendments expressly state they will become effective six months after the date of notification by the Director-General, whereas the existing IHR provides that amendments become effective 18 months after notification by the Director-General.
If accepted, these legally binding amendments would come into effect for all member states except those that explicitly reject them. Under Article 59 of the IHR, de facto approval is assumed for any member states that fail to reject or take reservation to the amendments.
The existing IHR, adopted in 2005, respect the sovereignty of all member nations. The proposed amendments, however, would expand and codify the WHO’s authority to implement global health mandates in direct violation of national sovereignty and citizens’ rights.
These proposals attempt to eliminate a nation’s autonomy, during times of real, assumed or anticipated public health emergencies, affording the WHO unilateral power in assessing and determining a health emergency and empowering the WHO to dictate policy and response.
All of this comes on the heels of the COVID-19 crisis during which the WHO grossly mismanaged all facets of the global health response by encouraging economy-destroying lockdowns, suppressing early preventive treatments and recommending interventions that have proven to be neither safe nor effective.
Under the guise of health regulations, these amendments would permit the WHO to seize executive governance powers over member states, granting governing powers to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats.
Below are just a few of the many ambiguous and concerning provisions in the amendments proposed by the US Department of Health & Human Services on January 18, 2022.
Proposed new text is displayed in bold underline, and proposed deletions to existing text are shown as
strikethrough exactly as written in the proposal. All other text remains unchanged.
Article 5: Surveillance
NEW 5: WHO shall develop early warning criteria for assessing and progressively updating the national, regional, or global risk posed by an event of unknown causes or sources…
In practice this would accord the WHO unilateral authority to enact a universal health surveillance system devoid of public scrutiny or transparency, leaving open the possibility of manufactured sources of pandemics and other emergencies.
Article 9, Section 1
WHO may take into account reports from sources other than notifications or consultations and shall assess these reports according to established epidemiological principles and then communicate information on the event to the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring.
Before taking any action based on such reports, WHO shall consult with and attempt to obtain verification from the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring in accordance with the procedure set forth in Article 10.
This excision from Article 9 eliminates consultations with the member state during an “alleged” health emergency while placing the WHO in a position to dictate how a State Party must proceed within its own territorial boundaries. This constitutes a threat to national sovereignty and self-determination.
Article 10, Section 4
If the State Party does not accept the offer of collaboration within 48 hours, WHO shall
may, when justified by the magnitude of the public health risk, immediately share with other States Parties the information available to it, whilst encouraging the State Party to accept the offer of collaboration by WHO, taking into account the views of the State Party concerned.
Any nation rejecting the WHO’s declaration will have only 48 hours to reconsider its position and comply, or be subjected to pressures from other nations and/or penalties such as economic sanctions. The views of the affected nation will no longer be considered.
Article 12, Section 2
If the Director-General considers, based on an assessment under these Regulations, that a potential or actual public health emergency of international concern is occurring, the Director-General shall notify all States Parties and seek to consult with the State Party…. If the Director-General determines
and the State Party are in agreement regarding this determinationthat the event constitutes a public health emergency of international concern, the Director-General shall, in accordance with the procedure set forth in Article 49, seek the views of the Committee established under Article 48 (hereinafter the“Emergency Committee”) on appropriate temporary recommendations.
Article 12 creates a new subclass of health emergency empowering the WHO Director-General to unilaterally trigger pandemic protocols based on mere supposition of a “potential” threat. The stipulation that a nation must agree with the Director-General’s assessment is eliminated. Distant bureaucrats would be empowered to enact health policy not only for entire nations, but by extension for individuals – irrespective of the wishes of the nation or the people.
New Chapter IV (Article 53 bis-quater): The Compliance Committee
1. The State Parties shall establish a Compliance Committee that shall be responsible for:
(a) Considering information submitted to it by WHO and States Parties relating to compliance with obligations under these Regulations;
(b) Monitoring, advising on, and/or facilitating assistance on matters relating to compliance with a view to assisting States Parties to comply with obligations under these Regulations.
One of the IHR amendments’ most insidious changes is the creation of a “Compliance Committee” that will serve as the administrative and enforcement mechanism to ensure member states comply with WHO emergency directives involving infrastructure, capital expenditures, information gathering and implementation of emergency responses.
In sum, the IHR amendments would, among other changes:
- Intensify the surveillance of all countries and their citizens.
- Grant the WHO the authority to tell other member states when one member state isn’t reporting and launch punitive actions.
- Empower the WHO Director-General to declare when and where a pandemic or “alleged” emergency is occurring using undisclosed sources.
- Confer unrestricted powers to the Director-General to define and implement interventions.
- Give the WHO the ability to access and mobilize capital in the event of a pandemic.
This power grab by the WHO, its donors, and stakeholders represents a direct attack on the political and economic sovereignty of all nations and their citizens.
By repeatedly promoting policies that caused catastrophic economic, social, physical, emotional and mental damage across the globe, the WHO has failed in its mission as global steward of public health and cannot be entrusted with setting policy for all citizens of the world.
Of note, the WHO enjoys immunity from every form of legal action, arrest, and searches of their papers, documents, and facilities.
The WHO should not be allocated more money, power, or authority nor should it be allowed to further control the world’s health agenda or implement biosecurity measures.
Global agreements brokered by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats must never be permitted to rule any nation.
It is imperative that each nation and territory retain its sovereignty, especially during times of crisis, so that the entire global community can be protected from globally directed policies that primarily benefit powerful financial and ideological stakeholders.
The undersigned respectfully request that all nations and their representatives repudiate such agreements.
We strongly oppose the proposed IHR amendments which would require nations and their citizens to adhere to the dictates of an unaccountable global body.
We oppose any involvement in a treaty, agreement, or other legally binding global document that would hinder any nation’s sovereignty in the area of public health.
We assert that nations and their citizens are best-positioned and -equipped to make health decisions appropriate to their communities.
We demand that the people of each nation be in charge of determining their response to health crises.
As citizens of the world, we defend the rights, freedoms, and privacy of all members of the global community by calling for the rejection of the IHR amendments and the WHO’s attempt to usurp the power and authority of health policy from its rightful place – at home amongst the people.
On May 18, 2022, this declaration was authored and signed by,
Health Freedom Defense Fund
Children’s Health Defense
Children’s Health Defense Europe
Truth for Health Foundation
World Council for Health
Corona Investigative Committee
Stand for Health Freedom
Doctors for COVID Ethics
Global Health Responsibility Agency
Alliance for Natural Health USA
US Freedom Flyers
National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC.org)
Transformative Health Justice
African Sovereignty Coalition
Idaho Freedom Foundation
No College Mandates
The Solari Report
Viruswaarheid, The Netherlands
Federal Employees for Freedom
Children’s Health Defense Africa
Informed Choice WA
TN Coalition for Vaccine Choice
Liberty Counsel Action
Advocates for Children
Weston A. Price Foundation
Faith and Liberty
New Mexico Stands Up
World Wide Demonstration
The Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Chair Children’s Health Defense
Mary Holland, President and General Counsel CHD
Dr Reiner Fuellmich, Attorney, Germany
Dr Peter McCullough, MD, MPH
Dr Naomi Wolf, CEO Daily Clout, author, Other People’s Bodies
Dr Stephanie Seneff, Senior Research Scientist, MIT
Dr Mike Yeadon, former Pfizer CSO
Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi
Prof. Michael Palmer
Dr Judy Mikovits
Brian S. Hooker, Ph.D.
Dr James Lyons-Weiler, IPAK
Dr Joseph Mercola, Founder/Owner Mercola.com
Michele Bachmann, former US Representative
Catherine Austin Fitts, President, Solari Inc.
Willem Engel, Founder Viruswaarheid
Dr Tess Lawrie, World Council for Health
Shabnam Palesa Mohamed, World Council for Health
Mat Staver, Founder/Chair Liberty Counsel
Leigh Dundas, Esq
Dr Andrew Wakefield
Dr Elizabeth Mumper, MD, FAAP, IFMCP
Virginie de Araujo-Recchia, Attorney, France
Ana Garner, lead counsel New Mexico Stands Up
Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt, attorney (Adv.) South Africa
Paul Chek, Chek Institute
Sarah Pope, The Healthy Home Economist
Philipp Kruse, Attorney, Switzerland
Josh Yoder, US Freedom Flyers
Miste Karlfeldt, ED, Health Freedom Idaho
Sarah Clendenon, ED, Health Freedom Idaho
Charlene L. Bollinger
Suggest a correction