World Health Organization ‘rams through’ Biden-promoted amendments to international regulations

The World Health Organization (WHO) hastily adopted amendments to its international regulations, drawing criticism from experts who claim the process violated WHO’s own rules.

WHO’s decision-making body, known as the World Health Assembly (WHA), “adopted” the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) in the final hours of its meeting in Geneva on Saturday night and early the next morning.

Medical and legal experts, as well as journalists, underscored the highly irregular proceedings that led to that point.

“Tedros broke the WHO’s own rules to ram through modified amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR),” wrote Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Christian legal ministry Liberty Counsel, regarding the actions of WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. 

“In the early morning hours this past Sunday, which extended past the June 1 date, Tedros violated the WHO’s own constitution to force a vote on the revised IHR with, according to Japan, only 1/3 of the member nations present,” Staver explained. “Tedros’ actions are a clear violation of the existing IHR. Article 55 states that ‘the text of any proposed amendment shall be communicated to all States Parties by the Director-General at least four months before the Health Assembly at which it is proposed for consideration.’” 

Physician and vaccine expert Dr. Robert Malone asserted Monday the IHR amendments were “illegally” approved “behind closed doors.” 

“[I]n close cooperation with the US HHS/Biden administration,” Malone wrote, the WHO has been working on revamping the current IHR agreement, which previously served as “a voluntary accord” that established “international norms for reporting, managing, and cooperating in matters relating to infectious diseases and infectious disease outbreaks (including ‘pandemics’).” 

“This hasty and illegal action was taken in direct violation of its own charter, once again demonstrating an arbitrary and capricious disregard of established rules and precedent by the WHO under the leadership of the Director-General,” he added. 

Similarly, James Roguski, a journalist and renowned expert on the WHO’s proposed pandemic treaty and IHR, wrote, “Unfortunately, this is an enormous loss for ‘We the People’ and a substantial victory for the evil forces that support the system of pharmakia,” referring to the Greek word from which comes the English word “pharmacy,” but can also refer to “witchcraft” or “sorceries,” he noted. 

“The recently adopted amendments will facilitate an enormous global build up of the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex which seeks to trigger ongoing ‘pandemic emergencies’ that will be made even worse by ‘relevant health products,’” he predicted, in a Substack post Saturday after the rushed approval. 

The sweeping IHR amendments are separate but related to the WHO’s recently failed pandemic treaty, which prompted Tedros to extend further negotiations for the treaty into July. 

The UN health agency’s director-general smiled as he expressed gratitude for the approval of the amendments. 

“And the pandemic agreement is not done yet, but I have no doubt it will be,” he proclaimed. 

The WHO’s pandemic treaty and IHR amendments are touted as seeking to attain “equity.”  

The mission is “the equitable distribution of ‘relevant medical products’” among rich and poor nations, according to Roguski, who interviewed Dr. Tess Lawrie over the weekend on the subject. 

Lawrie noted the WHO has “tried to bring in aspects of the failed pandemic treaty negotiations” into the amendments “by highlighting … pandemic emergencies.” 

“Now, new term, pandemic emergencies – not just a pandemic but pandemic emergencies – comes throughout that document with a new definition of what a pandemic emergency is,” she said. 

“[T]he declaration of emergencies is easily … abused,” Roguski agreed. “The definition that they came up with is so unbelievably vague, it might as well be meaningless, but it feeds the propaganda machine.” 

Roguski elaborated on the “circular logic” behind the authoritarian regulations. 

“There’s no way to check the director general’s decision … Once they triggered the authority, there’s no way to turn it off,” he said. 

“What this document really is, it’s an attempt to get funding from wealthy nations and organizations … to funnel money into building out big pharma in poorer nations that really should have other priorities: good clean water, good healthy food … fundamental nutrition. ‘No,’ [WHO argues], ‘let’s invest money in building out to manufacture more mRNA injectables around the world.’  

“And this really belies what I think is the core fallacy. It seems like everyone associated with the WHO thinks that pandemics can be prevented or prepared for or responded to by more diagnostics, more drugs and more jabs.” 

However, the fact that the IHR amendments were hastily approved may actually be a blessing in disguise, Roguski said. 

“And now people can clearly see what we were only able to guess about,” he noted. “I think they actually did us a favor by pushing this through. Now we know what their game really is.”