Members of the Entire world Health Organization (WHO), an unelected international public wellness agency, are meeting to think about a draft version of a proposed international pandemic treaty which will give the WHO new powers to “ tackle false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation” and be legally binding under international law.
The write treaty contains various procedures in Article 16 (“ Strengthening pandemic and open public health literacy” ) that will require the Whoms 194 member states (which represent 98% of all the countries in the world) to target so-called misinformation.
Member states are told to “ perform regular social media analysis to recognize and understand misinformation, ” design their own messaging to “ counteract misinformation, disinformation and false news, ” and manage “ infodemics ” (a phrase that was created by the WHO and describes “ too much information including fake or misleading information in digital and physical conditions during a disease outbreak” ).
While the provisions in Article 16 don’t directly demand member states to censor content that’s deemed to be misinformation, a provision in Article 14 (“ Whole-of-government and other multisectoral actions” ) paves the way for Huge Tech to perform this censorship on the WHO’s behalf.
Under this supply, member states are required to work together with non-state actors and the private sector through an “ all-encompassing whole-of-government, multistakeholder, multi-disciplinary and multi-level approach. ”
Before this pandemic treaty existed, Large Tech willingly mass censored any content it deemed to be “ Covid misinformation, ” even though there were no agreements or laws forcing them to do so. YouTube even introduced a far-reaching plan that made going against the WHO a violation associated with YouTube’s rules and deleted over 800, 000 videos below this policy .
Under the pandemic treaty, the ties between governments and pro-censorship Big Tech companies will become even more powerful and collaboration will be needed.
We obtained a copy from the draft international pandemic treaty for you here .
Not only are these Large Tech-government ties being reinforced by the treaty but the That has also demonstrated its determination to censor anything that this brands misinformation. Earlier this year, it called for Big Technology to work with it to censor monkeypox “ misinformation. ”
In addition , the idea that the WHO needs to be acting as an arbiter of truth is especially ironic considering that it was one of the most infamous producers of misleading information during the Covid pandemic. In a The month of january 14, 2020 tweet, the organization stated that “ first investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no obvious evidence of human-to-human transmission” from the coronavirus.
The meeting to discuss the set up treaty began on December 5 and will run till December seven. It’s being attended simply by members of an intergovernmental discussing body (INB) that was founded by the World Health Set up (WHA), the decision-making body of the WHO, in December 2021.
The INB was tasked with creating and negotiating a “ global accord on outbreak prevention, preparedness and reaction. ” This global contract has become known as the international pandemic treaty.
In line with the current proposed timeline, the INB expects to finalize the international pandemic treaty by May 2024 and present a final report to the particular seventy-seventh WHA meeting.
We attained a copy of the INB’s current proposed timeline to get you here .
In case passed, the international pandemic treaty will be adopted under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution . This article gives the WHA the power to impose legally binding conventions or agreements on WHO member states in case two-thirds of the WHA vote in favor of them.
This process of lawmaking circumvents the usual process of elected officials voting on the laws that will apply to their country by allowing a handful of global associates to decide on the rules that apply at all countries. Even if representatives from a third of the WHO’s member states vote against the international pandemic treaty, it can still be applied to their country under international law.
Not only does this method limit the power of politicians to decide on the laws that will apply to their specific country but it also limits the power of citizens to hold politicians responsible at the ballot box. The majority of the representatives for member declares are unelected diplomats who have remain in their positions, even when new governments are selected. And most of the votes that determine whether an international law pertains to a specific country are toss by representatives from other countries.
Despite this undemocratic process, the international pandemic treaty has got the support of numerous democratic nations including the United States (US), Uk (UK), North america , Sydney , New Zealand, and the European Council (EC) (which represents 27 European Union (EU) member states).
Some politicians from these countries have opposed the treaty and several petitions, including those that can force a parliamentary debate on the treaty, have got gained traction.
However , the international outbreak treaty is still very much on course to being finalized by May 2024 and the That has shown no intention of abandoning its far-reaching energy grab.