The W.H.O. IHRRC Includes One Of Our Human Rights Heros Lawrence O. Gostin Who Helped Draft Siracusa Principles. Learn Why This Is The Most Important Topic On Earth More Than The Treaty/IHR Amendment

We sure would hope human rights scholar Lawrence O Gostin, would stop being such a WHO suck up and apologist, because he is sending mixed messages to the WGIHR that met this week...

Feb 25, 2023

Fellow activist, researcher, friend James Roguski wrote an open letter to ask human rights & public health scholar Lawrence O Gostin to step down from WHO IHRRC…

but we say Lawrence Gostin should step UP and make sure the WHO is kept in line!

This is a really, really important topic, read more…

The Final Report of the The International Health Regulations Review Committee (IHRRC) was released and it is not as bad as it could have been, presumably because the body had Lawrence O Gostin and other human rights scholars involved in the final report to speak up to defend rule of law under customary international human rights and humanitarian treaties, such as Siracusa Principles.

NO other international instrument is as important as Siracusa Principles when it comes to determining the LIMITS of governments authority to limit your rights during a declared emergency.

Siracusa Principles Iccpr Legal Submission 1985 Eng

707KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Siracusa Principles places rules and the burden of proof on the health authorities to prove science, necessity, legality and it explains there is a *non derogable right for all people worldwide to be free of medical and scientific experimentation.”

non derogable means government can’t ever limit that natural right, even in an emergency.

Lawrence O Gostin proudly helped to draft this critical human rights protection document the Siracusa Principles. In our opinion, it may be the last thing on earth that can save us all from an eternal pseudo scientific health tyranny.

To get the readers interested in this topic, of why we think Lawrence O Gostin may be the one man to stand up to the WHO for us all, here is a tweet from Lawrence O Gostin from tonight, February 24, 2023, about this weeks upcoming pandemic treaty negotiations and it speaks to our heart because he says “INB #pandemictreaty transparency is far from ideal”, calling it out like we have been!

Lets hope he keeps up the pressure and keeps putting truth on the record.

HUGE, GIGANTIC, ENORMOUS NOTICE:
The Siracusa Principles are being redrafted right now, at the same time as the pandemic treaty.
We presume the redrafting of Siracusa Principles by the International Commission of Jurists is due to the horror show of covid measures violating Siracusa Principles in many countries, and THAT, dear readers, is a much bigger deal for humanity depending of if its strengthened or weakened than WHO’s IHR amendments or Pandemic treaty.
REALLY? YES.
Because it is the Siracusa Principles alone which reify governments international obligations in health emergencies, when attempting to limit our rights, which the WHO treaty and IHR must absolutely harmonize to!
Reread that. Let it sink in.
We are all focused on the treaty and IHR amendments, but in reality the bigger deal is the Siracusa Principles, which can help us to strike down and not adopt any proposed treaty or IHR amendment that fails to harmonize to Siracusa Principles! Feel it. Live it. BE the law.

Siracusa Principles 58. No state party shall, even in time of emergency threatening the life of the nation, derogate from the Covenant’s guarantees of the right to life; freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and from medical or scientific experimentation without free consent; freedom from slavery or involuntary servitude; the right not to be imprisoned for contractual debt; the right not to be convicted or sentenced to a heavier penalty by virtue of retroactive criminal legislation; the right to recognition as a person before the law; and freedom of thought, conscience and religion. These rights are not derogable under any conditions even for the asserted purpose of preserving the life of the nation.

61. Derogation from rights recognized under international law in order to respond to a threat to the life of the nation is not exercised in a legal vacuum. It is authorized by law and as such it is subject to several legal principles of general application.

62. A proclamation of a public emergency shall be made in good faith based upon an objective assessment of the situation in order to determine to what extent, if any, it poses a threat to the life of the nation. A proclamation of a public emergency, and consequent derogations from Covenant obligations, that are not made in good faith are violations of international law.

We are glad the IHRRC final report had 95% great human rights suggestions that harmonize to Siracusa Principles. However, there are also a lot of problems. We estimate the report had around 5% of proposed amendments that if adopted, would violate Siracusa Principles and ethical norms. The remainder 5% or so of lame proposals that are still left need an eye towards international law and human rights.

IOJ opposes the IHRRC’s spurious “human rights” suggestions regarding the surveillance and punishment of misinformation and vaccine passports for still experimental gene therapy or mRNA “health products”, such as covid-19 vaccines. It is worth mentioning that Lawrence is on a human rights body that did not forcefully oppose forced passports for experiments, so theres that.

WHO’s side is Lawrence Gostin on?

Never Forget Lawrence Gostin Said About Dr. Tedros Taking Office:

"We Have To Hold WHO To Account For Human Rights".

Let’s get into it:

The IHR review committee (IHRRC) met recently to negotiate proposed IHR amendments which seek to strike out “respect for dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms” from global public health law.

In their final report, the IHRRC stated:

Article 3 – Principles
The Committee strongly recommends the retention of the existing text "full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons” as an overarching principle in the first paragraph, and notes that the concepts of human rights, dignity and fundamental freedoms are clearly defined within the framework of treaties to which many of the States Parties to the Regulations have adhered. The inclusion of human rights in Article 3 of the current International Health Regulations (2005) was a major improvement on the previous 1969 Regulations.1 The reference to “respect for dignity, human rights and freedoms of persons” works not only as an overarching principle in Article 3, but also as a concrete reference point in the operationalization of all articles concerning public health response, response measures, additional health measures and recommendations. [IOJ is willing to bet our boy Lawrence chimed in on this verbiage and wise sentiment that we all know gave the world a sigh of relief]
-Page 28

First, Let us be clear there are many things Lawrence Gostin has said over the years which should really, really raise eyebrows…

The praise of Tedros raises eyebrows, as does his agreement with the DoJ misinterpretation of mandatory vaccines being allowed by private businesses. He’s perhaps literally correct as far as legalities, but should advocate more on the procedures needed to activate the required limitations of those powers, especially under ethical norms.

It’s true, Lawrence O Gostin is a WHO apologist, but hopefully he just gave praise to Tedros to get on the committee to make a real difference.

Its doubtful Lawrence is really in high praise of Tedros or the WHO, considering the spurious Tedros promise of WHO as a human rights champion is not exactly fulfilled under the covid debacle.

Here is a diagram from one of Lawrence Gostin’s books on Public Health:

IOJ thinks the balance of measures to protect public health are not being balanced with respect for human rights. There are serious ethical deficiencies which should be strengthened if public health law, pandemic treaties and IHR amendments are to have any shred of validity.

About Gostin:

Before people judge, just because the man works at the WHO in an IHR review committee that just had a secret meeting to amend the IHR, is ecstatic about member states being committed to new governance, and his emails all bounce so he’s unattainable (does NOT look good - agreed haha), we can never forget this human rights scholar DID help write the Siracusa Principles back in the 80’s, which are the governments limits to limit your human rights in an emergency. The man is actually quite a big deal on the world stage and in the ongoing formation of public health law. He deserves respect and to suspend judgment in our opinion, until he proves he completely lets us down. We wont lie, so far it is a let down to hear the human rights body, IHRRC, advocated for IHR proposals to have vaccine passports to track experiments, but we aren’t sure how much of that was his idea, or the whole story yet.

The WGIHR deliberated on the proposed IHR amendments from Monday February 20, 2023 to Friday February 24th, 2023 using the IHRRC final report to guide them, which thankfully insists its a BAD IDEA to remove respect for dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Lets see if Lawrence Gostin gets his act together before WHA in May, which is when the vote on IHR amendments is scheduled, and finally speaks up to demand IHRRC, WGIHR and member states determine that this vax pass nonsense is not acceptable under the same international norms that HE HELPED WRITE! Does he need a reminder of his own life’s work?

The GRAND Importance Of The Siracusa Principles:

Reifying the Siracusa Principles is the only thing that can save us now and in the future. Its the common customary international law under emergencies, but codified. Its the sole ethical guidance to compare the IHR amendments and treaty to.

If the new instruments omit ANYTHING in Siracusa Principles, it will be good cause to reject the new instruments.

If IOJ could force the governments to create a PROCEDURE to enforce the Siracusa Principles its game over for tyranny. IOJ is working on it as a long term goal.

When IOJ spoke at the WHO first pandemic treaty hearing we insisted any pandemic treaty would need to conform to Siracusa Principles. IOJ taught World Council For Heath the importance, and even convinced Dr. Tess Lawrie to chime in on the WHO 1st Pandemic treaty hearing to demand Siracusa Principles for WCH’s input. We are so proud, that because of us at IOJ, the ONE thing that matters, Siracusa Principles was put on the eternal record of protest for human rights norms during pandemics by IOJ and WCH, and we INSIST the WHO abide by it. Its CRITICAL!!!

If Lawrence Gostin stands his ground to protect his prized life’s work of the Siracusa Principles humanity may be saved. hear what he has to say towards the end of the video. We need him to step UP!!!

THE VIDEO IS 4 YEARS OLD AND ONLY 888 VIEWS.

TRANSCRIPT (sorry its not perfect - its just extracted from youtube): sometimes people ask me, you know why does law, justice and human rights have anything to do with public health, and my answer is usually everything!

Because if you think about health you think firstly about your own right to health and the World Health Organization Constitution United Nations treaties constitutions of many countries around the world include the right to health the right to a safe environment, sometimes the right to clean water or good food so these are all kind of basic needs that are really critical for a population or an individual to be healthy and that's the other thing about human rights human rights you know protect individual liberty autonomy freedom from torture and also anti-discrimination and the right to justice. So if you think about, you know, health, the environment. food, water, justice.

If you don't have dignity, justice and health it's very very hard to lead the kind of life that is vibrant and wonderful.

And so what your mother told you is true if you've got your health you've got everything. It's been an inspiring evolution of human rights over the last 70 years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Human rights law really only becomes a focal point of global health in the aftermath of the Second World War and drawing on the UN Charter the Constitution of the World Health Organization Nations would come together in 1948 to declare a common standard of achievement for all people in all nations in this Universal Declaration of Human Rights rather than laying out an expansive human right to health the Universal Declaration of Human Rights focuses on a standard of living adequate for health and well-being

the standard of living for health and well-being would encompass both a state obligation for medical care, but also a focus on a wide range of underlying determinants of health, as these underlying of determinants of health would be codified under international law in the aftermath of the Second World War. The Cold War would serve in many ways to hobble the expansive definition of the right to health first laid out in the Universal Declaration with the 1966 International Covenant on economic social and cultural rights limiting the right to health to a right to the highest attainable standard of Health in the midst of the Cold War

the United States and the Soviet Union would come at the right to health with very different ideological definitions of what that right to health included and with the right to health serving as a Soviet basis for critiques of capitalist inequalities and health the United States would push back against an expansive definition of the right to health in this International Covenant on economic social and cultural rights and yet after this low point in 1966 in the 1970s we see civil society the global South nations coming together around a more expansive vision of the right to health as WHO would be seen to have the normative legitimacy and authority to declare these obligations we would see in the 1978 declaration of Alma hata a revitalization of the definition of health and the WHO cons - sure a programmatic implementation for realizing that right under national health policy although the Declaration of Alma octa would never become part of international law we would see human rights thrive in the 1980s as civil society embraced a rights-based approach to health within the World Health Organization as a way to respond to the expanding hiv/aids pandemic with this foundation of human rights in global health the end of the Cold War would provide an opportunity for revitalizing obligations under international law and we would see in 2000 the UN Committee on economic Social and Cultural Rights declaring in general comment 14 an expansive vision of the right to health that encompasses a wide range of underlying determinants of health a vision in line with the 1970s WHO declaration of all Mata and providing a foundation for considering both individual medical care and a wide range of social economic and political determinants of health laying a foundation under international law for advancing Public Health into the future. The WHO was the actual first specialized United Nations agency that was formed when the United Nations was formed and that Constitution does two major things among many others, but one is it dedicates the organization as the global health and leader and it defines health very very robustly and broadly and then secondly it talks about rights and human rights and particularly the right to health.

W.H.O., to be very very honest, has not always been a champion of human rights

it's not always been WHO’s fault, there have been many powerful countries that have tried to stop WHO from you know being a human rights champion, but it is in WHO's DNA, it's in their constitution and it's critically important. So things like the right to primary care the right to universal health coverage are all central to the World Health Organization.

And now there's a new Director-General Dr. Tedros who's focusing on human rights and particularly celebrating the fact that WHO can return as a leader of human rights as we celebrate the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

So there's so much optimism and so much to look forward to WHO’s leadership in Human Rights, but we have to hold WHO to account. ~Lawrence Gostin

More about Gostin:

From a 2021 article regarding Pfizers bullying countries for sovereign assets:

“Pharmaceutical companies shouldn’t be using their power to limit lifesaving vaccines in low- and middle-income countries,” said Lawrence Gostin, a law professor at Georgetown University and director of the World Health Organization’s Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law. “[This] seems to be exactly what they’re doing.”

Gostin states: Protection against liability shouldn’t be used as “the sword of Damocles hanging over the heads of desperate countries with a desperate population,” he added.

Childrens Health Defense just noted, on February 22, 2023, in an article By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.: called, “As Public Trust Wanes, FDA Pledges to ‘Save Lives’ by Policing Online Content. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf has made combating “misinformation” a top priority for the agency, arguing it is a “leading cause of death” — though he admitted he can’t back up that claim with facts.

Lawrence Gostin, J.D., LL.D., a professor of global health law at Georgetown University, told the AP, “If you’re trying to counteract misinformation on social media your first job is to clarify, simplify and explain things in an understandable way to the lay public. I don’t think anyone could say that [the] FDA has done a good job with that.”

Gostin said the FDA’s reliance on experts to craft public health messages, which are then channeled through the media and “are often laden with scientific jargon,” results in “utter confusion” among the public. Sounds reasonable. Like perhaps he’s trying the soft approach to shoot it all down, rather than attack it directly and get fired as human rights advisor.

We are praying Lawrence O Gostin steps up and saves humanity and Siracusa Principles. We should all know soon how this weeks WGIHR negotiations are going about the IHR amendments, which we must remember, were guided by the recent IHRRC report that Gostin is a large part of, that said HELL NO you cant stop respect for dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms.

No one is more important in this process than Lawrence. He is the WHO’s top human rights expert. They need to listen to him and he needs to listen to the peoples of the world who have come together and are standing up for whats right against medical tyranny and unnecessary limitations of human rights.

Stay Tuned for the next update and call to action!

This up coming week is a huge week with the treaty deliberations and IOJ will be extremely busy trying to keep the WHO and the member states in check.