The WHO Treaty

WHO Pandemic Treaty: The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly – An Interview With Larry

Inside View 14/09/2023  Vijay Shankar Balakrishnan, Health Policy Watch

Below are the questions put to Larry. Click here for the full interview including responses.
"
●: What is a pandemic treaty?

●: What does it entail?
●: Based on your observations of the draft versions of the treaty, where are the opportunities for an “accord”?
●: There has also been a lot of “discord” during the pandemic accord negotiations. Which countries are contributing to these disagreements, and why?
●: What are your thoughts on the treaty’s negotiation mechanisms for promoting timely information sharing in the context of national interest conflicts?
●: What are the gaps in the draft treaty?
What are their origins, and what are some suggested solutions?
●: What are the main stumbling blocks to a robust treaty?
●: Could you comment on mechanisms the United States, Africa, and the European Union suggested?
●: How confident are you in incentivizing compliance, given the IHR enforcement issues during the COVID-19 pandemic?
●: Why prioritize incentives over sanctions, especially when some experts argue for stronger enforcement measures?
●: How will negotiators balance accountability and sovereignty when implementing compliance measures?
●: Will equity discussions lead to concrete actions for fair access during health crises?
●: What are the potential consequences of the draft Accord’s narrow focus on health-centric solutions?
●: What’s behind the resistance to the UN High-Level Meeting, and how might it affect the Geneva discussions?
●: What role does the pharma industry play in shaping the treaty, and how do we differentiate responsible advocacy from profit-focused lobbying?
●: Why is the draft UN Political Declaration not ambitious, and how can it be strengthened, especially regarding the ‘Global Health Threats Council’?
●: How can WHO and the UN tackle misinformation while preserving citizen privacy and free speech on social media through collaboration with governments?
'At the opening of the 73rd WHO Africa regional meeting in August, WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus warned that the slow pace of negotiations has put the pandemic accord at risk of missing the May 2024 deadline'.
●: What’s your take on the pandemic treaty timeline, balancing speed and thoroughness, and a realistic estimate for an ideal agreement’s timing?
●: How do we address the draft treaty’s health-centric focus criticized by some, considering the need for a broader approach to pandemic response during negotiations?
●: What’s the current status of discussions on the Pandemic Fund, and how might it impact the treaty?
●: How do initiatives like medical countermeasures and mRNA tech-transfer hubs fit into treaty discussions, and what’s your perspective on their impact, given the crisis faced by initiatives like ProMED?
●: What do you think about the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board‘s key asks for the UN HLM declaration on the treaty negotiations, like changing the language from ‘acknowledge’ to ‘commit’?
●: What do you think about the social media backlash WHO has been experiencing, regarding social media listening/surveillance, which seemed to be included in the treaty draft and poses privacy threats to citizens in countries where social media expressions are turned against them?
●: How did the misconception that WHO agreements, like a pandemic accord, would erode national sovereignty start, and what can be done to combat this misinformation going forward?"

Zero Draft of the WHO CA+ for consideration of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body

WHO convention, agreement or other international instrument on. pandemic prevention, preparedness and response (“WHO CA+”)1 Feb 2023

For full document, click here.


article 26.1 An Bunreacht na hEireann Reference of Bills to the Supreme Court

Article 26 of the Constitution provides that the President of Ireland may, after consultation with the Council of State, refer Bills of the type prescribed in that Article to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether any such Bill or specified provision(s) thereof is repugnant to the Constitution. There have been 15 such references to date.

See here 15 citations in The Supreme Court of Ireland website.

Estonia Rejects WHO Treaty

Eddie Hobbs comments on Estonia notifiying WHO that it rejects the Pandemic Treaty and amendments to International Health Regulations.

On 22 November, 11 Members of the Estonian Parliament wrote a letter to the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) to reject the proposed international agreement on pandemic prevention preparedness and response – also known as the “Pandemic Treaty” or “Pandemic Accord”. The letter also rejects the amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) (“IHR”).

Crotty Vs An Taoiseach

CROTTY v. TAOISEACH(CONSTIT. VALIDITY)
CROTTY v. AN TAOISEACH & OTHERS
[1987] IESC 4
The State may become a member of the European Coal and Steel Community (established by Treaty signed at Paris on the 18th day of April 1951), the European Economic Community (established by Treaty signed at Rome on the 25th day of March 1957) and the European Atomic Energy Community (established by Treaty signed at Rome on the 25th day of March 1957). No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State necessitated by the obligations of membership of the Communities or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the Communities, or institutions thereof, from having the force of law in the State".Crotty v an Taoiseach and Others - Case Law - VLEX 793401417
https://ie.vlex.com/vid/crotty-v-an-taoiseach-793401417

Estonia rejects WHO Treaty
Estonia signatures rejecting WHO Treaty
Irish Times Crotty Vs An Taoiseach & Others

Crotty Vs An Taoiseach was a Judicial review of executive powers. It shows that the people of Ireland can have any Bills, Legislation or Acts referred to the Supreme Court for judicial determination to see if they are in harmony with the provisions of An Bunreacht. If they are found to be repugnant to the Irish Constitution, they must be nullified and deemed 'null and void'.

Link to original 2012 article, click here.