The World Health Organization (WHO), through the International Health Regulations (IHR), has been given more authority over people’s health. TrialSite previously reported on this development on April 6, 2022. Does this represent a global power grab or simply a rational measure to better synchronize national health agencies?
Cairns News, a right-leaning mainstream media (owned by News Corporation) channel across Australia, claims that the WHO, which remained silent on vaccine mandates in November 2021, will implement universal vaccinations under a Pandemic Treaty. The same media channel also claims that people are being robbed of their human rights under the guise of a pandemic response. Meanwhile, some members of the United Nations (UN) have already mandated complete COVID-19 vaccination if people want to access public spaces and continue performing their profession (e.g. healthcare or public service workers).
IHR
IHR requires countries to detect, assess, report, and respond to public health events. Their scope includes travel and trade monitoring that may restrict inter-country travel or trade based on approved regulations.
In December 2021, the US pushed its amendments onto the WHO member states, disregarding and not being on equal footing with the amendment proposals of other countries. The US proposal contained the following:
Acceleration of information sharing to and from the WHO
Sharing of genetic sequence information
Compulsory acceptance of the WHO’s assistance/collaboration in preparedness and response
Opening of outbreak sites for international assessment
Promotion of a multi-stakeholder approach
This proposal did not address the concern of developing countries regarding financial and technical assistance to comply with the proposed amendments. After all, expecting low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) to ramp up to the technical capacity of rich nations is hardly rational, or fair.
Third World Network (TWN), an independent, non-profit international research and advocacy organization in Malaysia, reports that the call for developing countries to adopt a timeline and process for submitting proposals to the Working Group on Strengthening WHO Preparedness and Response to health emergencies (WGPR) was not recorded in its summary report. WGPR seems to be putting more importance on the interests of the US for the proposal over other developing countries, TWN adds.
In addition to the amendments, the WHO is currently drafting and negotiating a “Pandemic Treaty”.
The Pandemic Treaty
The Pandemic Treaty was proposed by Charles Michel, the president of the European Council in November 2020. In February 2021, EU leaders agreed to work on an international treaty on pandemics. A consensus was then reached in December 2021 to start the draft and negotiate a convention under the WHO. The Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) was then constituted and held its first meeting in March 2022 to agree on ways of working and timelines; the second meeting will be in August 2022 to discuss working on a draft of the treaty.
The Council of the European Union authorized the opening of negotiations for an international pandemic treaty on March 3, 2022. The Pandemic Treaty aims to:
ensure higher, sustained, and long-term political engagement at the level of world leaders of states or governments;
define clear processes and tasks;
enhance long-term public and private-sector support at all levels; and
foster integration of health matters across all relevant policy areas.
It would support and focus on:
early detection and prevention of pandemics;
resilience to future pandemics;
response to any future pandemics, in particular by ensuring universal and equitable access to medical solutions, such as vaccines, medicines, and diagnostics;
a stronger international health framework with the WHO as the coordinating authority on global health matters; and
the "One Health" approach, connecting the health of humans, animals and our planet.
Its benefits would be:
better surveillance of pandemic risks;
better alerts;
better response;
better access to health supplies and services;
research and innovation;
better response mechanism;
better implementation; and
restoration of trust in the international health system.
The INB is currently accepting comments from the general public on topics to include in the Pandemic Treaty. The registration link can be found here, with the second public participation round planned for June 16 and 17, 2022.
The People
According to Julian Savulesco, Director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics at Oxford University, mandatory COVID-19 vaccination can be justified when there is a significant threat to public health. Savulesco states that such a mandate can be imposed when there is a high chance of people harming others and meets the following conditions:
A grave threat to the public
The vaccine is safe and effective
Mandatory vaccination has a superior cost/benefit profile compared with other alternatives
Level of coercion is proportionate
The European Parliament expressed its concern about democracy and the rights of the citizens that might be affected by the decisions made by authorities. This is because as far as a pandemic response is concerned, the actions of governments have so far violated or manipulated many treaties, especially human rights agreements claim many.
Human rights concerns were been raised as soon as a global pandemic was announced in 2020. Such concerns are still ongoing as governments manage and address the global situation. Are authorities violating people’s rights by giving themselves greater power? Or should people’s rights be momentarily pushed aside for the betterment of the pandemic situation? Authoritarian and globally driven or more democratically and locally nuanced and directed---a fundamental conflict emerges, driven by health care.