MANDATE THE STATE!!!!! Last Chance To Sign To Stop Votes At WHO WHA77??? IOJ Sends Urgent GPW14 (General Program Work) Risk Report To Member States and WHO Executive Board For WHA77
MANDATE THE STATE!!!!! Last Chance To Sign To Stop Votes At WHO WHA77??? IOJ Sends Urgent GPW14 (General Program Work) Risk Report To Member States and WHO Executive Board For WHA77
IOJ SERVES LEGAL DISPUTES TO WHO DELEGATES LAST NIGHT - Do YOU want to join IOJ in being the BIGGEST RISK To WHO Funding? Of course you do: Check this GPW14 RISK REPORT out and help share quickly!
This is long, but IOJ promises, there is NOTHING more important in the WHO saga.
First our story of WHY,
Then the letter we just sent to WHA77 Delegates, for you to see the details of the WHAT : )
IOJ’s Urgent GPW14 (General Program Work) Risk Report To Member States and WHO Executive Board For WHA77
Thousands, literally thousands, of hours went into this. You may want to study it.
[subsequent update: COSTA RICA WAS THE ONLY COUNTRY TO LISTEN AND REJECTED THE TREATY BASED ON OUR WORK AND THIS REPORT! YAY!]
And if you appreciate our work, you may want to support it! IOJ APPRECIATES help!
Sharing is caring! Please share, like, comment, donate - all support is really needed for this critical urgent action!
The following is how we DESTROY the WHO.
It’s a WAY bigger deal than it may appear at first glance. Check out how we will all take down WHO below, using the RISK REPORT GPW14 factor : ). This is the beginning of the end folks!
Mandate the State
When we say State- we mean MEMBER STATE - a country, by the way!
Most Delegates received this and already opened it last night and today! The verbiage is pasted below:
At the bottom is the Costa Rica and US Delegates - Check to see if your delegate is in receipt of IOJ’s legal disputes, and if so, write them to ask them to support it!
OK we actually only have time to post a small part of the list of Delegates who already got this - we will post the full list in a few hours or later today, as time permits!
If your Delegate to WHO is not on the list that we already sent it to, please let us know (you will need to send us your Delegates contact - easy instructions at bottom of page) and we will hook your country up by sending them a copy, and following up legally.
We actually have the craziest stories how this went down with NO sleep for days, and with Foreign Affairs and even the CR Comptrollers office running around like crazy to get this message to the Delegates for us in time & the Foreign Affairs writing back midnight to get it together! We will post the mad dash to remedy story very soon!
Look folks, The WHO and their Member States (the ones who screwed us over) can KEEP their sovereign immunity, BUT ARE RESPONSIBLE, for attending Interest of Justices claims.
WHY? This is about a SERIOUS BREACH - meaning we can’t get the illegality and human rights violations of WHO experiments to stop. For years they ignore us and wont stop or even talk about it.
There is a documented and ongoing intentional non response by WHO to IOJ and Free Speech Associations scientific disputes on PCR, the covid EUL shots, the UN Trusted News Monopolization of information and censorship racket of truth under guise of an “infodemic” - etc, etc, etc. Yes, all of it is ignored for 2+ years by WHO “oversight & ethics” department. Enough is enough!
MANDATE THE STATE!
At this point, the MEMBER STATES are currently being kindly reminded of their UNAVOIDABLE duty to invoke the international law of responsibility, which MANDATES THE STATES to “cooperate together to bring to an end the serious breach”.
MANDATE THE STATE IN THE NICEST WAY : )
In this case IOJ just told the Delegates that IOJ & FSA wants the Member States to force WHO to settle our disputes and NOT FUND WHO, exit instead, but if they wont exit forever, we assert they can’t fund the WHO until the serious breach is resolved, because to do so would not be in compliance with international law.
The States would be ASSISTING the WHO’s breaches if they ignore this risk report, and that is ILLEGAL.
The member states are supposed to follow the laws mandate to “cooperate to bring to an end the serious breach” and DO SOMETHING - certainly, they cant fund WHO in good faith after reading our notice of harm and claim asking MS (Member States) to help us.
Its their DUTY to bring WHO’s serious breaches to an end, but funding WHO this WHA77 in new programs is NOT a duty, that is discretionary. So now what?
Mandate the WHO Member State! Let’s get into it.
WHY DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO MANDATE THE STATE?
Stop funding of WHO NOW!!!
Stop GPW14 a year early (vax, censorship, evils - NO)
Stop IHR Amendments - Violates procedure at this time, Article 55(2) Period
Learn below:
THE WHO’s SERIOUS BREACH - FAILING TO RESOLVE OUR DISPUTES
Rules are rules!
WHA Rules of Procedure: Article IX - Settlement of Disputes Section 31 "Each specialized agency shall make provision for appropriate modes of settlement of: (a) Disputes arising out of contracts or other disputes of a private character to which the specialized agency is a party; (b) Disputes involving any official of a specialized agency who by reason of his official position enjoys immunity, if immunity has not been waived by the specialized agency". These provisions ensure that specialized agencies have mechanisms in place to handle disputes effectively, whether they involve contractual issues or the actions of officials who are protected by immunity.
110.8 “Misconduct” means:
110.8.1 any improper action by a staff member in his official capacity; 110.8.4 any conduct contrary to the terms of his oath or declaration
Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts
https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_6_2001.pdf
Draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations
https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_11_2011.pdf
Over the next month and two you will all receive a full education on how to hold WHO and Member States responsible for the shots, discrimination, censorship and abuses of powers that BOTH are allowing.
Don’t worry, this will all make sense, and your Delegate knows PRECISELY THE HARD CORE NATURE OF THE DOCUMENT THAT MANY OF THEM ALREADY OPENED! It does not need to say mandate, this is DIPLOMACY. They absolutely get it that we are not letting this go, and all Countries are responsible now they are made aware of IOJ’s legal claims that WHO is in breach of duty, because the international laws being invoked clearly mandate all states to work together to help us stop WHO breaches, including censorship programs, unsafe shots, etc. This is all a test on how to get the law to work, so let’s go!
Below is the exact verbatim letter the Delegates just received:
Below is what we sent WHA77 in Geneva, that all the Delegates are OPENING : )
Urgent GPW14 Risk Report To Member States and WHO Executive Board For WHA77
Declaration of harm by WHO Monopolization of Participation in Science & Procedural Violations
Addressing Agenda Item 17 - GPW14 and IHR Amendments
Urgent WHO Disputes Needing Resolution
Notice of Claim dispute of a private nature
Introduction:
Esteemed Members of the WHO Executive Board and Representatives of Member States,
We write today to address critical concerns regarding Agenda Item 17 - GPW14, the 14th General Programme of Work for 2025-2028. This risk report aims to highlight the reasons for not funding the WHO under the current circumstances and instead pursuing legal action against the organization for alleged human rights violations and monopolistic practices in scientific discourse. These concerns are substantiated by documented evidence of censorship and exclusion of civil society organizations (CSOs) from crucial consultations.
Evidence of Censorship and Exclusion
Documented Censorship of CSOs
“For the purposes of GPW 14, the term “global health ecosystem” refers to the complex network of interconnected players at community, country, regional and global levels – across governmental and non-State actors, and public and private, health and health-related sectors – that exert influence on the health and well-being of people, whether directly or indirectly.”
Despite the Member States mandating WHO to consult with CSO’s for GPW14 and despite the WHO actually starting the first CSO consultation process, the reality is that on October 30, 2023, the Interest of Justice and Free Speech Association were censored during the GPW14 CSO consultation, and later ignored about the problem in the 12 January 2024 consultation.
Steering Committee Reports Are Biased
In the reports from the GPW14 Steering Committee to Member States, they failed to consider key input. These dissenting CSO’s that were censored by the GPW14 Steering Committee, headed by Jeremy Farar the WHO Chief Scientist (who has a specific duty to facilitate participation), comprised 7.4% of the 27 participants, and yet WHO overtly censored them from sharing their relevant information. This exclusion is documented in a letter published on the Interest of Justice Substack, called “WHO Censored Free Speech Association's Comments Yesterday In The WPG14 CSO "Consultation" which details the systematic denial of participation in scientific discourse due to perceived bias within the WHO. This exclusion undermines the principles of transparency, inclusivity, and respect for freedom of expression, which are fundamental to the legitimacy and effectiveness of WHO's policies. Additionally, the Free Speech Association was censored for sharing a link to a video of UN Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications, Melissa Fleming, stating that the UN "owns the science" and had partnered with Google to ensure that UN-approved climate science appears at the top of search results, effectively suppressing dissenting views to Agenda 2030. This action directly impacts the validity of the UN Agenda 2030, SDG’s and related climate and health agendas, as it creates a false climate emergency consensus by censoring dissenting scientific opinions.
A Public Portal to Participate Was Never Provided By WHO After Publicly Stating Multiple Times They Will Produce One
Despite promising a public portal to participate in GPW14, and despite our organizations asking to provide one, because WHO omitted their duty of participation as promised, the WHO completely failed to provide any place for the public to participate and comment. This means the entire public would be negatively affected by being unable to participate in the design, approval and implementation of health policies which affect them, a situation which denied health rights and rights to participate. In countries where right to participate is enshrined in the constitution this is an issue of unconstitutionality in the national level. It also means the entire GPW14 is not valid due to this grave omission and failure to achieve WHO’s original promise of participation and a truly inclusive “global health ecosystem”.
Joint Letter to WHA77
Interest of Justice also signed an important letter presented at WHA77 by the Global Health Council, The letter in support of FENSA has been sent to the Chairs of the World Health Organization (WHO) Programme, Budget and Administration Committee (PBAC) and the 155th Executive Board. The letter has also been forwarded to Dr. Tedros. This letter, signed by over 130 signatures from both Non-State Actors (NSAs) in Official Relations with WHO and Non-NSAs/CSOs, complained about the exclusion of CSOs by the WHO and the shrinking civil society space. The letter emphasized that the WHO's actions are limiting the participation of diverse voices in global health governance, which is essential for the development of inclusive and effective health policies.
Specific Concerns Raised by Key CSO Representatives Dustin Bryce, Lady Xylie, and Other Censored, Persecuted and Marginalized Civil Society Harmed By WHO
Dustin Bryce from Interest of Justice and Lady Xylie from Free Speech Association have been vocal about their exclusion from WHO consultations. They, and other CSO's were initially chosen by the WHO as relevant stakeholders April 2022, as mandated by the WHO Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB), meaning that WHO recognizes them as “having relevant information to share”. However, after dissenting to certain scientific views, they were excluded from further participation and even overtly censored in WHO consultations’s. Despite attending every WHO and HHS OGA stakeholder engagement hearing and submitting numerous letters and ethics complaints, their concerns have not been addressed. Please see public participation video May 3, 2023 HHS Stakeholder Listening Session explaining the WHO’s non response https://rumble.com/v2lwy0c-ioj-speaking-truth-to-power-exposing-w.h.o.-crimes-may-3-2023- hhs-stakehold.html as well as. https://rumble.com/v10s1rx-interest-of-justice-establishes-strict-limits-for-the-who-pandemic-treaty-p.html?mref=138ft6&mc=6x039
Unanswered Ethics Complaints
Interest of Justice has filed scientific, human rights, corruption and ethics complaints filed on 1/23/2023 4:59 -881786000902 and 11/30/2022 2:52AM - file number 637327854202 against the WHO Director-General and Chief Scientist. These complaints, supported by witnesses including Dr. Michael Yeadon, former VP of Pfizer, and other top experts, have gone unanswered for around 2 years. This lack of response raises serious questions about the WHO's commitment to ethical standards and accountability.
We stand firm in our assertion that WHO acts against the broader constituency of the global health ecosystem, showing extreme bias, discrimination towards us and disregard for the publics right to participate. WHO has shown their own lack of integrity in the lead up to asking for more funding than ever in history, under the guise that civil society and the public will be included in meaningful participation, which is cause for lack of trust to be highly justified to the point of defunding the WHO and holding them responsible for serious breaches, rather than approve GPW14 and funding of contested programs and policies.
Please see one of many notice of claims/disputes: May 21, 2023, Notice of claim for responsibility to "The Health Monopoly": United States And Other Wrongdoer States, Covid Action Platform (WHO, WEF, Wellcome), WHO Vaccine Pre qualification EUL Program (WHO, FDA-CBER, EMA et al), UN Procurement including pharmaceutical Sponsors and Investors or Funders of WHO and all challenged programs and funds including Agenda 2030 SDG’s Not Backed By Science and violate Jus Cogens
WHA76 and WHA77 Plea To Terminate Tedros and Settle Our Disputes Still Not Answered for 2 years
The following was presented to the WHO executive Board last year for WHA76, with no response, and sent to ethics with no response for around 2 years:
Please find the main grounds for Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus termination on the spot outlined below, which must be responded to within 8 days or less if urgent according to WHO Staff rules. We think is past due and therefore, very urgent.
As you are aware, according to Staff Rule 1070.1 A staff member’s continuing or fixed-term appointment may be terminated if his performance is unsatisfactory or if he proves unsuited to his work or to international service and under 1075.2, A staff member may be summarily dismissed for serious misconduct, if the seriousness of the misconduct warrants it, subject to the notification of charges and reply procedure required by Staff Rule 1130 Such staff member shall not be entitled to notice of termination, indemnity, repatriation grant or end-of-service grant.
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus must be terminated under 1075.2 and 1110.1.7 summary dismissal for serious misconduct because the seriousness of the misconduct warrants it and he is non responsive to multiple notification of charges and reply procedure required by Staff Rule 1130 where he is accused of a prima facie claim of serious undue experimentation in violation of Costa Rica biomedical reserch law 9235 Article 78, 79.
Please find the main grounds for Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus termination on the spot outlined below, which must be responded to within 8 days or less if urgent according to WHO Staff rules. We think is past due and therefore, very urgent.
As you are aware, according to Staff Rule 1070.1 A staff member’s continuing or fixed-term appointment may be terminated if his performance is unsatisfactory or if he proves unsuited to his work or to international service and under 1075.2, A staff member may be summarily dismissed for serious misconduct, if the seriousness of the misconduct warrants it, subject to the notification of charges and reply procedure required by Staff Rule 1130 Such staff member shall not be entitled to notice of termination, indemnity, repatriation grant or end-of-service grant.
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus must be terminated under 1075.2 and 1110.1.7 summary dismissal for serious misconduct because the seriousness of the misconduct warrants it and he is non-responsive to multiple notification of charges and reply procedure required by Staff Rule 1130 where he is accused of a prima facie claim of serious undue experimentation in violation of Costa Rica biomedical reserch law 9235 Article 78, 79
The misconduct pertinent to this claim, which hereby invokes the WHA duty to terminate Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, is as follows:
110.8 “Misconduct” means:
110.8.1 any improper action by a staff member in his official capacity; 110.8.4 any conduct contrary to the terms of his oath or declaration
Under CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE SPECIALIZED AGENCIES Section 22 Privileges and immunities are granted to officials in the interests of the specialized agencies only and not for the personal benefit of the individuals themselves Each specialized agency shall have the right and the duty to waive the immunity of any official in any case where, in its opinion, the immunity would impede the course of justice and can be waived without prejudice to the interests of the specialized agency.
Humanity forcefully invokes Article 22 and claims the immunity would impede the course of justice and can be waived without prejudice to the interests of the specialized agency.
Of critical importance is that humanity also invokes the following HHS OGA's duty in Section 16 Privileges and immunities are accorded to the representatives of members, not for the personal benefit of the individuals themselves, but in order to safeguard the independent exercise of their functions in connexion with the specialized agencies. Consequently, a member not only has the right but is under a duty to waive the immunity of its representatives in any case where, in the opinion of the member, the immunity would impede the course of justice, and where it can be waived without prejudice to the purpose for which the immunity is accorded.
Ghebreyesus’s misconduct and the WHO UN procurement irregularities regarding the covid-19 declared emergency and response, we invoke Section 23 Each specialized agency shall co-operate at all times with the appropriate authorities of Member States to facilitate the proper administration of justice, secure the observance of police regulations and prevent the occurrence of any abuses in connexion with the privileges, immunities and facilities mentioned in this article.
The WHO's Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is charged with two counts of violating Biomedical Research Law 9234 ARTICLE 78, 79
These are violations of non derogable rights to free thought and the the right to be free of medical and scientific experimentation enshrined in ICCPR and Siracusa Principles Article 69, and also violates the UN Supplier Code of Conduct as well as Costa Rica civil code Article 47, Images and photographs with stereotyped roles that reinforce discriminatory attitudes towards social sectors cannot must be published, reproduced, exhibited or sold. See: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-coronavirus-vaccines-skeptic/ Where the UN and WHO laundered censorship and paid private contractors to censor, defame and harass our Chief Scientist Dr. Yeadon, presumably for his scientific dissent.
Implications of Censorship and Exclusion
Impact on Civil Society
The exclusion of CSOs from the GPW14 consultations has significant implications for civil society. It prevents diverse voices from contributing to the development of global health policies, undermining the democratic process and potentially leading to policies that do not adequately address the needs of all stakeholders. This exclusion also violates the rights of CSOs to participate in public affairs and to freedom of expression.
As recently noted by the UN HR Rappaport for Cultural Rights, “the same human rights approach is required by States when acting as members of international organizations. They cannot ignore their human rights obligations but must actively ensure that the effective participation of civil society is guaranteed in discussions with international organizations that relate to the benefits and harms of scientific products. That is currently not the case. More space must be ensured for civil society and for more consideration of alternative scientific understandings beyond the prevailing ones in decision‑making by such organizations
Emergencies, real or inflated, have been used to bypass democratic control in scientific use. There is a need to use law, including human rights law, in implementing science, and to reinforce the legal, regulatory and policy framework to allow for democratic control over the scientific enterprise.” - UN HR Rappaport for Cultural Rights - April 5, 2024
Monopolistic Practices in Scientific Discourse
The WHO's actions can be seen as part of a broader trend of monopolistic practices in scientific discourse, where certain voices are privileged over others, which is a violation of cultural rights to participate in science. This undermines the integrity of scientific debate and can lead to the suppression of important perspectives and innovations. Such practices are contrary to the principles of open and inclusive scientific inquiry, equality and participatory and open government.
Bias and Dysfunction in the WHO's Current Process for Handling Complaints Against the Director-General
Agenda Item 24.2 Process of handling and investigating potential allegations against WHO Directors-General addresses significant concerns regarding the current process for handling complaints, allegations and investigations against the WHO Director-General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. Our organizations are very interested in this topic.
Since 2022, organizations such as Interest of Justice, Free Speech Association, and individuals like Dustin Bryce and Lady Xylie have filed numerous complaints against Dr. Tedros and the Chief Scientist. These complaints include allegations of serious breaches affecting public health and safety, crimes, and research misconduct. Despite attending every WHO and HHS OGA stakeholder engagement hearing and submitting copious letters, their concerns have not been addressed.
This ongoing lack of response highlights the bias and dysfunction within the WHO's current process, which fails to ensure accountability and transparency and ensures the WHO’s monopolization of information and science, including blocking the access to justice and denying inclusion by dissenting CSO’s, such as us stakeholders who are excluded by WHO from meaningful participation. This is a serious breach and we request all Member States assistance to cooperate to bring to an end the serious breach of obligations regarding these serious unanswered claims and charges.
Specific Allegations
Research Misconduct and Experimentation Violating Laws: Allegations include research misconduct and experimentation that violate the laws of various countries. These serious breaches have significant implications for public health and safety.
Crimes Against Humanity: There are allegations of crimes against humanity involving the WHO EUL covid vaccine, risky mRNA platform technology and misuse of power and confidentiality clauses to hide known adverse effects and trial data, omitting what is required for informed consent, which require immediate and thorough investigation. The attack on free opinion and freedom to not participate in science, research and experimentation, and persecution means that non derogable rights are affected, requiring immediate attention and settlement of the unresolved scientific and ethical disputes and serious breaches.
Exclusion and Censorship: The WHO has systematically excluded and censored civil society organizations (CSOs) and individuals who dissent from the organization's scientific views or question its policies. This undermines the principles of transparency, inclusivity, and freedom of expression.
Failing Audits: Poor performance and extreme waste of resources.
Serious Breaches: of International Obligations owed Erga Omnes to uphold human rights and scientific integrity, causing harm, death and torts for the commercial profit and benefit of WHO’s private funders.
Lack of Independent Investigation
Inadequate Response from WHO
The WHO's Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) conducted a preliminary review of allegations against Dr. Tedros, but the process and findings were not made public. This lack of transparency raises serious questions about the WHO's commitment to ethical standards and accountability.
Failure to Address Complaints
Despite the serious nature of the allegations, the WHO has not initiated an independent investigation or provided a substantive response to the complaints. This failure to address the complaints undermines the credibility and integrity of the WHO.
Proposed Changes and Their Implications
Process for Handling Allegations
The WHO has proposed a new process for handling and investigating potential allegations against its Directors-General. This process, outlined in the document "Process of Handling and Investigating Potential Allegations Against WHO Directors-General," includes several steps for reporting, reviewing, and investigating allegations. Our organizations strongly object to the proposed changes and advocate for a hearing where the public can offer input, as promised.
Critique of the Proposed Changes
Monopoly on Access to Justice: The proposed changes create a monopoly on access to justice by centralizing decision-making power within a single external investigative entity. This entity is selected based on criteria that may not ensure impartiality or independence.
Lack of Transparency: The process lacks transparency, as the findings and decisions of the external investigative entity are not made public. This prevents stakeholders from holding the WHO accountable for its actions .
Exclusion of Member States: The proposed process limits the involvement of Member States in the investigation, reducing their ability to oversee and ensure the integrity of the process .
Inadequate Appeals Process: The appeals process is limited to the International Labour Organization Administrative Tribunal, which may not provide adequate recourse for those affected by the WHO's decisions .
Legal Framework for International Responsibility
State Responsibility for Human Rights Violations
Under international law, States can be held responsible for violations of their international obligations, including human rights commitments. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has established that states can incur international responsibility for promulgating laws that contravene their human rights obligations, even if no specific human rights violation has occurred. This principle supports the argument that the WHO, as an international body, should be held accountable for actions that violate the rights of CSOs, critics and human rights defenders.
Furthermore, the IHR Amendments as written would incur Member State responsibility for promulgating laws that contravene Member States human rights obligations.
Obligations Under International Human Rights Law
The WHO, as part of the United Nations system, is bound by international human rights law, which includes obligations to respect, protect, and fulfill human rights. This includes ensuring non-discriminatory access to participation in decision-making processes and protecting the rights to freedom of speech and association. The documented exclusion of CSOs from the GPW14 consultations and censorship of scientists constitutes a breach of these obligations.
GPW14 Risks Outweigh Benefits
RISK DESCRIPTION
Abuse of power in WHO's one sided guidance may lead to the establishment of an environment of acceptance of violation of the cultural right to participate in science, impacting the reputation of the Organization as a United Nations health agency.
GPW14 would fund very unproven and risky open source global data systems, a novel intervention, under who digital health programs. This is too early of a stage to actually agree to, let alone actually implement without inviting severe political risk of a large cybersecurity attack significantly compromising critical HQ, Regional, and/or Country information systems, WHO digital assets or critical data leading to discontinuity of operations, financial losses, legal proceedings, or damaged reputation.
There are open and unanswered fraud and corruption cases that involve the misuse of funds by staff and non-staff in procurement, potentially leading to inability to implement WHO activities in an effective, efficient and economical manner and to major donor and Member States outrage and loss of confidence in WHO's ability to manage funds.
Patently false, fraudulent, misleading or poor data or unavailability of data in health, due to ineffective IHR 43 and "management" of conflicts of interest in major funding which is causing clear political interference in scientific decision making may affect the ability of the WHO and its partners to identify public health needs, respond to them effectively and demonstrate results and impact.
Mistrust in science and in the negative impact of WHO's health activities, with misinformation and disinformation campaigns amplified by social media targeting health, may result in criminal and human rights abuses charges against WHO for directing and controlling the crime of serious undue experimentation by ubiquitous denial of adequate and truthful information (often incorrectly called mis and dis information by WHO and their paid bribed partners such as Google and Trusted News Initiative) required to make informed decisions about WHO recommended EUL or PQ interventions and free choice and reach of WHO's health policies and guidelines in certain communities and in loss of public and Member States trust.
Inability to prevent, detect and manage cases of abuse and harassment of dissenting scientists and critics, for the purpose of creating a scientific monopoly and denying dissenting experts and journalists the right to participate in science, and other forms of misconduct thereby harming people and affects the reputation of the Organization.
Strained WHO workforce, such as the EUL office which UN staff confirms has an email which does not function, no phone # and is understaffed, which ultimately results in reduced organizational performance as well as reputational damage as a United Nations health agency. Ethics department won’t even answer a single complaint, which are rising in numbers and piling up.
Unsustainable financing and the inherent structural defects in WHO rules allowing an unaccountable monopoly able to deny and abuse human rights on a widespread and systematic way, which is a serious breach of international obligations, that no money could ever fix, because the law requires reparations and cessation of the wrongful act of monopolization of science which reforms under the monopolies own rules are still a monopoly that harms health rights rather than protect those same rights as entrusted when formed. Audits in WHO are showing extreme waste. Member States would be safeguarding right to health more efficiently by rejecting GPW14 and not continuing to invest in the failing WHO policies which are scientifically flawed. The Core organizational mandate cannot be implemented, because of key functions, projects or programmes being persistently underfunded, suffering sudden funding interruptions or funding in short-term cycles, with consequent impact on WHO's continuity of operations, the recruitment and retention of skilled staff and effective long-term planning and delivery. The Member States have a duty to protect and this requires not funding a risky failing organization that is not addressing serious charges against their DG and Chief Scientists.
Adapted from Office of Compliance, Risk Management and Ethics (CRE) May 14, 2024
Call to Action
Exit the WHO and Prohibit Private Monopolies in the Public Interest
Given the documented evidence of censorship, exclusion, and monopolistic practices by the WHO, as well as documented unresolved disputes and the need for accountability, the following actions are recommended by Member States:
Exit the WHO: Withdraw membership and funding from the WHO until it addresses the concerns raised and implements comprehensive reforms to uphold transparency, inclusivity, and respect for freedom of expression.
Do not adopt the IHR Amendments: which would violate IHR 55(2)
Prohibit Private Monopolies in Public Health: Initiate legal and regulatory measures to break up perceived monopolies and prevent undue influence of private corporate interests in global health governance and scientific discourse.
Terminate WHO Leadership: Terminate the positions of WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and Chief Scientist Jeremy Farrar. Waive their immunities and require them to apologize for denying the right to participate in science, a recognized cultural right. Prosecute their actions against human rights under the law of international organizations' responsibility.
Demand Accountability: Require the WHO to explain why they censored Free Speech Association and Interest of Justice, thereby failing the obligation to implement transparent and inclusive consultation processes that respect the rights of all stakeholders, including civil society organizations, to participate in decision-making without censorship or marginalization. Demand Accountability: The WHO shall settle the CSO's disputes of a private nature that they are not responding to, ensuring that all concerns are addressed in a timely and transparent manner.
Settle CSO Disputes: The WHO shall settle the CSO's disputes of a private nature that they are not responding to, ensuring that all concerns are addressed in a timely and transparent manner.
Protect Whistleblowers and Dissenting Voices: Establish robust mechanisms to safeguard whistleblowers, journalists, and civil society actors who expose wrongdoing, challenge scientific consensus, or voice dissenting views in the public interest.
Conclusion
The WHO's actions in censoring and excluding civil society voices from its consultations and failing to settle our disputes for so long, despite being urgent and involving human safety, misconduct of the DG Tedros and systematic ongoing widespread violation of our rights to participate in science and health policies represent a serious breach of international principles of transparency, inclusivity, and freedom of expression denying cultural rights. It is imperative that Member States take decisive action to uphold the integrity of global health governance by exiting the WHO, prohibiting private monopolies from unduly influencing public health policies, and protecting the rights of all stakeholders to participate in decision-making without fear of reprisal.
Rather than support the WHO by recklessly approving and funding GPW14 and first round funding, which meets 7 out of 10 of the risks in the May 14, 2024 risk report, please support us victims of WHO’s mismanagement and inefficiency. We are vulnerable, marginalized, censored, excluded and our list of Disputes, including science and ethics disputes is not yet settled.
We also strongly urge you to join the courageous elected officials who are collecting signatures until 11:59pm EDT on June 7, 2024 (throughout the World Health Assembly and WHO Executive Board meetings). See: ReviewtheWHO.org The first batch went to Tedros on Sunday, May 26, 2024, before the start of WHA.
The Member States are the oversight of WHO and cannot justify more funding of this admittedly failing organization that is failing to abide by their own strict procedural rules under IHR Article 55(2) and WHA Rules of Procedure Article IX - Settlement of DisputesSection 31 Settlement of Disputes, which is undoubtably causing harm to civil society, Member States and monopolizing health information and science.
Thank you for your attention to this critical matter.
Signed, sealed delivered… & OPENED!!!
*the end of IOJ’s writ / notice & demand / dispute*
Many, many delegates already opened this last night and this morning. We are now gathering a list of as many delegates as we can find that we may have missed!
Will this work? Who knows, its absolutely correct and worth a shot, especially since other WHO schemes are falling apart simultaneously, but if they screw us over, rest assured that IOJ didn’t sleep and kicked ass, SO HARD, so that we could ensure and accurately set up the case against the WHO and set it up legally for many of you in the countries where your Delegate was made aware of the problems.
You are welcome, someone had to do something legally binding, based on real legal issues, rather than just protest. Happy to help!
Team IOJ
Attachment that was also sent with it:
Please find just a few of the notice of claims & disputes for IHR 55 that are not answered which are also supported by many signatories around the world, to get more understanding of some of the disputes. We would like to settle our disputes in a public or private hearing with due process:
Introduction - The Many Unanswered Complaints Against Dr. Tedros
We are Marginalized interested and relevant Stakeholders. Provided is a small timeline of events. We could not fit everything in. This is only part of the timeline of non responses from WHO etc..
Please find just a few of the many notice of claims & disputes that are not answered which we would like to be heard on and settle immediately:
First: April 12, 2022 - Spoke at WHO 1st treaty hearing
May 13, 2022 - Spoke HHS OGA Stakeholder Listening Session And Sent HHS/OGA Stakeholder Engagement Package (Same SHEP to WHO May 3, 2022)
May 13, 2022, 50,000 Demands Sent From Around The World To HHS OGA to withdraw IHR Amendments submitted by Loyce Pace - May 22-28, 2022 - at 75th WHA (12 of 13 IHR Amendments withdrawn)
May 14, 2022 - 14,587 comments here that were sent to you, which you did NOT yet get in your inbox!!!!
Xavier Beccara and Sr. C. Guillermet Fernández
June10, 2022 Call for input – democratic and equitable international order: challenges to international peace and security
August 29, 2022 To The Office Of The Department Of Exterior Politics, Costa Rica
September 9, 2022 Interest Of Justice 90 Second Video Entry To The WHO/INB Pandemic Treaty
Sept. 9, 2022 We have written numerous letters with no response in regards to our International Organizations desire to be included on Annex E for the 2nd hearing September 29-30, 2022
October 12, 2022 to Ministry Of Foreign Affairs Costa Rica
October 31, 2022 (WHO) World Health Organization, WGIHR and IHRRC
November 27, 2022 Dear World Health Organization, I demand the organization launch an independent investigation into the current WHO Director General and ex Chief Scientist Soumya Swaminathan's potential crimes against humanity
DECEMBER 16, 2022 W.H.O. Director General Head of Legal Affairs Entire IHRRC Entire WGIHR
January 23, 2023 Notice of charges and reply
February 19, 2023 Dear GBS-INDICO Secretariat,
February 22, 2023 foia to WHO
March 6, 2023 FOIA To: Secretary of Defense (Office of the Secretary of Defense/Joint Staff (OSD/JS), Department of Defense Health Agency, The Committee on Armed Services of the Senate The Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives And Secretary of Health and Human Services
List of WHO Arguments from IoJ Admin docs to WHO entire timeline
Written Comment Re: Implications of Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Commitments/Regimes and Other Proposed Commitments in the WHO Pandemic Agreement
April 13, 2023 Request for help to login to the HHS FOIA system - Our Organization has not received the help needed, the FOIA was denied months later
April 13, 2023 To: World Health Organization Our first request was sent on October 31, 2022 and Pending Unanswered Questions:
April 28, 2023 To: Ethics Team, WHO/DGO/CRE/Ethics Unit, WGIHR, IHRRC, INB We have not heard back from the relevant WHO departments you notified
May 3, 2023 HHS Stakeholder Listening Session Speech IoJ
May 10, 2023 Written Comment Re: Stakeholder Listening Session for WHA76
May 21, 2023 Final Notice of claim to Piercy, OGA, Colin, HHS ACFO, Ministry of foreign affairs and political affairs CR, president CR, global health HHS
June 20, 2023 HHS Stakeholder Listening Session
June 28, 2023 HHS Stakeholder Listening Session
July 1, 2023 Corrected written comment RE stakeholder listening session IHR to Colin Invalidity Report
July 24, 2023 to WHO, Member States, Delegates, INB and WGIHR, This is a Writ of Prohibition issued
September 19, 2023 URGENT REQUEST FOR COMMUNICATION TO SDG SUMMIT 2023 REGARDING INVALIDITY OF UN POLITICAL DECLARATION WHICH VIOLATES JUS COGENS To: United Nations Human Rights OHCHR Secretary General António Guterres
October 20, 2023 Dual Use FOIA To: Secretary of Defense (Office of the Secretary of Defense/Joint Staff (OSD/JS), Department of Defense Health Agency, The Committee on Armed Services
October 20, 2023 DoD OTA FOIA To: Secretary of Defense (Office of the Secretary of Defense/Joint Staff (OSD/JS), Department of Defense Health Agency, The Committee on Armed Services
October 31, 2023 WHO Censors Free Speech Association
November 10, 2023 Proposal for Global PACT By Interest of Justice Science Task Force IHR and Pandemic Invalidity Report to
INB, WHO, International Community, WHA, WGIHR, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, HHS OGA, and Dr. Gaudenz Silberschmidt Director of Health and Multilateral Partnerships WHO
Friday November 24, 2023 To: every global decision maker to alert them regarding the upcoming November 28, 2023 deadline to REJECT THE International Health Regulation (IHR) AMENDMENTS
November 27, 2022 To: IHRRC The Director General of the World Health Organization (Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus), the Working Group for amendments to the International Health Regulations (WGIHR) and to the International Health Regulations Review Committee (IHRRC),
December 6, 2023 GPW14 CSO Collaborative report regarding the consultation document: Advancing health equity and health systems resilience in a turbulent world – a global health agenda for 2025-2028 Promoting, providing and protecting health and wellbeing WHO’s Fourteenth General Programme of Work
Please see demand sent and signed by thousands of people and sent to the WHO December 29, 2023, Pre Lawsuit Notice Of Claim To UN, WHO & All Global Wrongdoers - Terminate Tedros - do not rehire! (notes below of excerpts
January 12, 2024 (GPW14), 2025–2028 Advancing health equity and health systems resilience in a turbulent world: a global health agenda for 2025–2028
January 21, 2024 HHS DoD Freedom of Information Act Appeal
January 22, 2024 Interest of Justice speech:
January 22, 2024 Ladies and Gentlemen of the United Nations and Member States,
January 22, 2024, United Nations for the Declaration of Future Generations United Nations
Written comment Re; Implications of access and benefit sharing (ABS)
January 4, 2024, Comment To Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct
To: (ORI) Office of Research Integrity/(HHS) Health and Human Services Regulatory Information Number: (RIN) 0937–AA12 Comment
January 27, 2024, WHO Executive Board Meeting, This is a notice for United States HHS OGA to cease and desist the WHO funding and programs.
February 3, 2024, Remind WHO WGIHR Meeting Feb 5-9, 2024: DO NOT VIOLATE IHR! NO IHR Amendments Allowed, (Notice and demand sent by 1000’s of people)
February 3, 2024
February 6, 2024 GPW14 Comment, 2025–2028 Advancing Health Equity And Health Systems Resilience In A Turbulent World: A Global Health Agenda For 2025–2028 GPW14 Report, GPW14 written participate
April 17, 2024 comment for Stakeholder Listening Session on Public Health Emergencies Preparedness and Response Negotiations
April 11, 2024 Spoke at HHS OGA listening session
Summary of 2022 - 2024 WHO Admin timeline IoJ Reports
May 19, 2024, INB, WGIHR, DG et. al..
Also see many unanswered letters and excerpts of content, which affect the WHA77 Agendas
Some, but not all claims sent to the Executive Board last year, 2023, at WHA76, in the civil society dispute with DG Tedros, which he never answered are below:
UN-WHO is in violation of international law and therefore RESPONSIBLE for cessation and reparation of globally directed State and private censorship of WHO science & ethics dissenters
We claim there is attribution to UN-WHO of acts of false declarations of emergency, exaggerating the diagnosis, complicating the treatment with unethical completely unproven novel gene therapies mischaracterized as vaccines while suppressing ethical unproven safe effective interventions like HCQ and Ivermectin, systemic and widespread acts of disinformation, deception, manipulation, coercion, threat and other illicit means to commit acts of global eugenics human experimentation which may impermissibly affect the human genome heritage of humanity, acts of political interference in scientific decision making, as well as acts of psychological and biomedical terrorism, torture, and serious breaches of ethics and anti corruption which violate international customary law and human rights law
We claim the right to a public scientific debate hearing and also a private internal scientific integrity dispute procedure with our experts to be able to challenge the UN-WHO science for climate, gene based vaccines, and behavioral interventions for "vaccine uptake" programs.
We claim the right to responses from the WHO ethics investigations where we pressed charges in November 2021 against the WHO DG Tedros, regarding our claims and right to remedy, which are seriously delayed to the point of non response by WHO "ethics".
WHO has a duty to terminate Tedros and waive his immunity to allow charges to proceed.
Index for unanswered complaint/claims against EUL:
1. Serious Undue Medical Experimentation in violation of Costa Rica’s Biomedical Research Laws, Siracusa Principles and Penal Code International Crimes
2. Serious Undue Psychological Experimentation in violation of Costa Rica’s Biomedical Research laws, Siracusa Principles and Penal Code International Crimes
3. Declaration of emergency not in good faith
4. limitations to rights not strictly required by the exigencies
5. Fraud or research misconduct
6. Censorship in the GPW14 CSO Consultation limits our rights and we require reparations and cessation of the UN censorship and information control programs.
7. Impermissible germline editing through covid-19 vaccines may affect future generations
Evidence regarding the illegality of the WHO EUL for covid-19 non vaccines which omit informed consent:
Costa Rica Biomedical research law 9234 Article 78, 79 serious undue experimentation.
ARTICLE 1.- Object of the law The purpose of this law is to regulate biomedical research with human beings in health matters, in the public and private sectors.
ARTICLE 2.- Definitions
Adverse event or reaction that would be attributable to the experimentation: unfavorable occurrence that:
a) results in death,
b) threatens life,
c) requires hospitalization of the participant or extension of the existing hospitalization,
d) produces persistent or significant incapacity or invalidity, or produces a congenital anomaly or birth defect.
Experimental, clinical or interventional biomedical research: any scientific research in the area of health in which a preventive, diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is applied to human beings, in order to discover or verify the clinical, pharmacological or pharmacodynamic effects of an experimental product, a medical device or a clinical or surgical procedure; or that attempts to identify any adverse reaction to an experimental product, device, or procedure; or study the absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of an experimental product, in order to assess its safety and efficacy or assess the outcome of an unproven psychological intervention. For the purposes of this law, all references to clinical research shall be understood as experimental, clinical or interventional biomedical research in human beings in the area of health.
Legal Sources:
WHA Rules of Procedure: Article IX - Settlement of Disputes Section 31 "Each specialized agency shall make provision for appropriate modes of settlement of: (a) Disputes arising out of contracts or other disputes of a private character to which the specialized agency is a party; (b) Disputes involving any official of a specialized agency who by reason of his official position enjoys immunity, if immunity has not been waived by the specialized agency". These provisions ensure that specialized agencies have mechanisms in place to handle disputes effectively, whether they involve contractual issues or the actions of officials who are protected by immunity.
110.8 “Misconduct” means:
110.8.1 any improper action by a staff member in his official capacity; 110.8.4 any conduct contrary to the terms of his oath or declaration
Stopping WHO is a hell of a lot of work and yet IOJ can barely pay their bills. Support is critical and HIGHLY APPRECIATED in this fight for humanities freedom.
Costa Rica:
MaryMunve Ministry of Health Costa Rica
adriana.salazar@misalud.go.cr
WHO committees:
gpw14-steerco-sec@who.int
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Chief Delegate: Mr. Xavier Becerra Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services
Deputy Chief Delegate: Ms. Bathsheba (Sheba) Nell Crocker Ambassador, Permanent Representative, Geneva
Ms. Loyce Pace: Assistant Secretary, Global Affairs, Office of Global Affairs, Department of Health and Human Services
Adam.Aasen@hhs.gov
Alyssa.Jones@hhs.gov
Betsy.Newcomer@fda.hhs.gov
Brian.Reich@hhs.gov
Caya.Atkins@hhs.gov
Chelsea.Dickson@hhs.gov
Christina.Taylor@hhs.gov
Colin.McIff@hhs.gov
Edward.Trimble@nih.hhs.gov
Gabrielle.Lamourelle@hhs.gov
Kacey.Wulff@hhs.gov
Katie.Thomas@hhs.gov
Kimberlee.Trzeciak@fda.hhs.gov
Kimberly.Boland@hhs.gov
Loyce.Pace@hhs.gov
Mackenzie.Klein@hhs.gov
Matthew.Lim@hhs.gov
Melea.Atkins@hhs.gov
Michael.Beard@hhs.gov
Pamela.Hamamoto@hhs.gov
Summer.Galloway@hhs.gov
Tyler.Rodgers@hhs.gov
Xavier.Becerra@hhs.gov
jbc7@cdc.gov
jvc5@cdc.gov
kel4@cdc.gov
lsa5@cdc.gov
qjm8@cdc.gov
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE OF COVID WHO GLOBALLISTS AND TERRORISTS??? NOTHING = THEY ALL MURDER AND CAUSE SUFFERING ASK THE PEOPLE WITH POTS
They will ignore anyone who isn't supporting them... is our only chance to ignore them? or ban them to Pluto? Your work is fabulous as it informs the world of the agenda they have for us, and the fact they will not acknowledge any dissent... they plan to change our food, just lab grown I suppose, or whatever makes us stay home and stay quiet. This is worse than anyone could imagine.