Watch: Spotlight on World Health Organisation
The International Alliance for Justice and Democracy (IAJD) are a grassroots legal advocacy group working to confront the World Health Organisation (WHO) and their globalist associations on the increasing human rights violations occurring universally in the name of public health. On 28 May 2022 they hosted a press conference at the Geneva Press Club, entitled “Democracy at Threat by WHO’s [World Health Organisation] Centralisation of Power”. The purpose was to raise awareness and promote publicity of their concerns following WHO’s 75th World Health Assembly (WHA) meeting, held from 22 to 28 May 2022.
The conference was convened by Swiss lawyer Philipp Kruse in conjunction with Polly Tommey of Childrens Health Defense. A range of speakers presented on matters relating to law, human rights advocacy, historical and financial issues, and detail of World Health Organisation regulations, management and practices. IAJD make a call for action, in particular to other lawyers and human rights advocates, but also to the general public.
World Health Organisation: Breaching Human Rights
The theme of increased authoritarian powers being imposed on global populations in the name of a public health emergency was threaded throughout the conference. National parliaments and judiciaries have suspended the rule of law and constitutional order, using pandemic response measures as justification. This has caused harm to society, public health and economies. Human rights abuses have occurred in this way through history, and the Siracusa Principles were published in 1984 as a foundational protection.
Mr Kruse suggested that the 75th World Health Assembly, after more than two years leading a pandemic response, would surely have used their convention as an opportunity for reflection and quality improvement. Instead, the meeting focused on strategies to execute more powers, obtain more funding and build stronger structures. The IAJD recognise this as an imminent emergency for democracies and constitutions.
Legal counsel and President of Childrens Health Defense Dr Mary Holland provided a deep insight into the foundational doctrines of health care, including individual and local level participation, cooperation and informed consent. She described the lack of accountability within the World Health Organisation who plan to remove the need for consent from national governments and individuals, and grant themselves greater coercive tools.
The increased powers WHO have accumulated since their creation in 1948 are linked to regulatory capture by industries such as “big tobacco, big pharma and big tech”. Vaccines have become a source of profits and are now heavily connected to corrupt practices resulting in extreme human rights abuses. Dr Holland provides a number of historical examples of widespread harm and catastrophic death associated with vaccine programs.
Historic events have given rise to a deepening corruption within WHO which has been observed during the Covid-19 pandemic. Effective life saving early treatments have been aggressively suppressed, children forcibly removed from parents, fraudulent diagnostic tests promoted and injections with substances which suppress the innate immune system aggressively promoted and mandated. Despite the appalling record outlined by Dr Holland, WHO Director General Tedros seeks to increase his dictatorial powers over governments with the right to declare pandemics without accountability and to enforce despotic measures and corrupted processes.
Proposed Changes to the WHO Internal Health Regulations
Philip Kruse then outlined the changes to the WHO Internal Health Regulations (IHRs) being proposed with specific reference to the USA administration who composed 13 points and tried to fast track them with minimal public participation. Thanks to concerted and collaborative civil society campaigns a counter-proposal saw 12 of these points withdrawn. The remaining amendment relates to a reduction in the time given for public review and rejection of future new regulation proposals, further diminishing public participation.
A WHO working group published a final draft of the IHR amendments on 23 May. This draft recommends four main areas of change and is based on a survey which only involved 64 of the 194 member states, and allowed non-member states to reply to the survey. The process involved 60% non-member states and only 40% member states, highlighting the lack of democratic process within WHO. The proposals all aim to extend WHO’s authority in activities with the full right to override national sovereignty.
Mr Kruse describes in detail the ways in which we can find ourselves in a “neverending pandemic creation cycle” with WHO in full control of defining biological threats, deciding the diagnostic procedures, declaring Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEIC) and enforcing response interventions such as lockdowns and mandates. If they are approved, the recommendations will become legally binding.
The International Alliance for Justice and Democracy have established with the aim of informing the public of this tyrannical agenda and ways in which we can act to stop it. Political pressure, insisting on proper investigations of the Covid-19 response, is required to evaluate all counter measures. Mr Kruse makes a call for other legal experts to join the cause.
Corruption, Conflicts of Interest and Mismanagement
Shabnam Palesa Mohamed, representing the World Council for Health and Childrens’ Health Defense (Africa) presented on her knowledge of the corruption and conflicts of interest within WHO. She outlines the collaborations between World Health Organisation, United Nations, World Economic Forum and their influential investors. The secretive nature of processes relating to the IHR amendments and new pandemic treaty suggest an attack on democracy.
WHO and the UN are not built on democratic principles, but rather through monopoly and specifically corporate monopoly. Ms Mohamed describes the established history within WHO and the UN, of conflicts of interest, mismanagement and corruption, referencing the TrustWHO documentary. She goes on to define and discuss the types of conflicts of interest. Private funding influences from the pharmaceutical industry have resulted in recognition that WHO is the biggest threat to the world’s public health of our time and she provides specific detail about the corporations and institutions embedded within these funding structures.
National delegates at the World Health Assembly are veiled in secrecy and do not consult with the people of their country before voting on decisions of significant impact. The Director General of WHO has been accused of mismanaging Ebola, abuse of office and support of civil war. So far complaints have seen no outcome in this regard.
Bill Gates is preparing his GERM proposal, a project involving 3,000 hand picked experts to be deployed in the instance of an actual or potential PHEIC. Ms Mohamed provides detail as to why the WHO is “an unending pit of resource wastage, leeching funds from sovereign nations who would do better to invest those funds into their national health programs”.
With intense lobbying underway to convince WHA representatives to vote in favour of these amendments, and with digital passports and social credits already activated or in planning, an effective resistance campaign is needed. Sanctions against countries who do not comply with IHR or the pandemic treaty have already been suggested by European Union officials. Ms Mohamed describes this as the weaponisation of health using WHO as the tip of the spear.
World Health Organisation in Africa
Ms Mohamed then provided a regional update on the role of WHO in Africa and she describes a cesspit of unethical experimentation, systematic discrimination, violations of human rights and research standards, wasteful spending and feeding of pharmaceutical industry interests. One example of a number that she outlined is a WHO Malaria study on Ghanaian, Malawian and Kenyan children without adequate informed consent. The GlaxoSmithKline vaccine Mosquerix resulted in ten times more cerebral malaria in the vaccinated group than the unvaccinated, and a doubling of deaths in young girls.
During the Covid era, Africa has seen the lowest rates in both infections and vaccinations as people relied on natural health practices and natural medicine, which WHO has a role in trying to obstruct. WHO tried to force experimental vaccine products on people and democracies have been subverted with lockdowns and often violent tactics used by police and military. Ms Mohamed describes the devastating impact this had on the economy which paves the way for loans from the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, holding Africa and perhaps the world to a constant cycle of debt and corruption.
She then offers solutions to the problems created. Firstly, an international independent investigation of WHO’s role in each country both historically and during the Covid chapter. Where criminal acts, recklessness or negligence are involved, diplomatic immunity must be removed.
Secondly there are three considered options to deal with the IHR amendments, pandemic treaty and other tactics that may be used by UN, WHO and WEF machinery. These are:
- Opposition. Object or vote against amendments to legislation. Make a reservation on part of the amendments which constitute a violation of individual rights and sovereignty.
- Representivity and self determination of the people. Using existing legislation within UN infrastructure, or alternatively a reliance on natural and common law, it is possible for us to make representation to the UN that enhances representivity and self-determination.
- Defund and exit WHO for reasons of mismanagement, corruption and conflicts of interest, costs of facilitating and managing these illegal instruments and the stifling of free speech and information led by WHO.
Other recommendations are contained in an open letter by the World Council for Health and their partners, which reached 417 million people within 17 days of publication. WHO failed to provide clear and ethical guidance on masks, lockdowns, repurposed medications and experimental injections. The only way to secure real health is to defund WHO and exit the globalist machinery. Proposed IHR amendments and pandemic treaty have given the world strong reason do this. The call to action is clear: Stop the WHO and co-create a better way for a better world.
World Health Organisation in India
Indian lawyer Dipali Ojha described the legal battles happening with some success in India with regard to pandemic measures and the harms they have caused.
All vaccine mandates were invalidated by the Supreme Court of India on 2 May 2022. Results of the 115 page judgement include:
- The government are directed to make adverse event reporting easy for and accessible to everyone.
- In future cases of interference with fundamental citizen rights, eg lockdown restrictions, a constitutional review is required.
- The government are asked to publish the clinical trials data regarding childhood vaccination.
The High Court in Bombay heard a challenge to vaccine and mask mandates which were withdrawn completely. The challenge has asked for the following, and respondents must file their replies before the next hearing on 22 July 2022. Details of the case are available at www.indianbarassociation.
- The return of fines collected from people not wearing masks.
- Compensation for the infringement of fundamental rights caused by restrictions imposed which had no sanction in law.
- Criminal prosecution of officials responsible for bringing in mandates.
Three petitions have been filed in the High Courts of India: two in Bombay and one in Kerala. Monetary compensation is sought by parents who lost a child after dose 1 of Covishield (Astra-Zeneca) vaccine. Ms Ojha outlines the cases involving young people who died after taking a mandated vaccine. A request has been made to investigate all who have peddled the narrative that these vaccines are safe and effective and that they are the only solution in avoiding illness with Covid.
The defendants include Bill Gates, Adar Poonawalla (CEO of Serum Institute of India, who partnered with Gates to manufacture Covishield), officials such as secretaries of state and of central government and other health officials responsible for bringing in the mandates. In two of these cases the governmental adverse events report clearly states a direct causal relationship between the death and the vaccine.
As people become aware of these petitions, it is expected more petitions will be filed. Authorities have thrown laws and established procedures out of the window and media have been complicit. Good people worldwide are starting to raise their voices and register their protests against the wrongdoings, illegalities and irregularities in the conduct of those blatantly abusing their power to the detriment of humanity. Ms Ojha states that they are very confident that they can thwart the plans of these people seeking totalitarian control.
European Context and Update
French lawyer Diane Protat outlined some of the cases she has been involved with in regard to pandemic-related human rights violations. In March 2021 during France’s third lockdown an 80yo male client argued to the court that he had received two doses of vaccine and should therefore not be required to lockdown again. The court replied that lockdown was still required because the vaccine doesn’t work. Despite this, in July 2021 President Macron imposed compulsory vaccination through a vaccine passport.
French authorities implementing WHO legislation refer to scientific experts. The Supreme Court have stated that these experts cannot be legally challenged because they are only advisors and have no effect on the lives of people, which is clearly untrue. People are required to take the vaccine and many are suffering side effects.
Ms Protat represents two groups in France challenging the response through the Supreme Court. French Freedom Flyers are a group of pilots, hostesses and stewards arguing that they cannot perform their duties when suffering from side effects, which can cause in-flight safety concerns. The European Court of Human Rights have heard the case.
The second group Ms Protat represents is named “Where is My Period?” and consists of 15,000 women experiencing post-vaccine menstrual irregularities. One woman belonging to both Freedom Flyers and Where is My Period testified that she has to choose between her flying licence and her uterus!
The European Medicines Agency have suggested that these symptoms are caused by stress. A young child who lost his sight five days post-vaccine was also told it may be caused by stress. Experts continue to claim that vaccination benefits outweigh the risk but it is very clear that the risk of vaccination outweighs the benefits for the majority of the population.
Austrian lawyer Dr. Georg Prchlick then presented some legal arguments relevant to Europe and specifically Austria. With WHO planning to increase and strengthen their role in global health architecture, the English parliament asked the following to the European Commission: “The Commission is asked, to what extent will it ensure that the citizen who has no direct vote in a body such as the WHO is not bypassed in the decision-making process and that the shift of competence further and further away from the voter does not lead to an increasing de-democratisation of our society?”. The Commission averted the question, merely answering that WHO is a serious institution.
Dr Prchlick suggests that trusting WHO just because they have some phrases in their constitution would be a serious error against the upholding of democracy. He names WHO as an important hindrance to pharmaceutical company sales due to their role in checking medicines and giving recommendations and permissions for the sale of products including vaccines. Until 2019 vaccine development was an expensive and time consuming process, requiring certain checks and tests. Since 2020 the balance sheets have altered as the PHEIC has allowed cheap production and quick product-to-user timeframes, bypassing many of the previously required checks and balances.
In Austria, this profiteering is reflected in decisions made by the courts. Dr Prchlick outlines the example of the Austrian Chambers of Medical Doctors, responsible for medical licencing. Medical practitioners who express a professional medical opinion conflicting with the pharmaceutical industry agenda are accused of lethal crimes and have their medical licences removed. This includes anyone speaking about the vaccines but also doctors offering exemptions from wearing face masks. The court refuse to consider scientific evidence, stating that the Minister for Health’s opinion is adequate.
USA Context and Update
Lawyer and founder of the Health Freedom Defense Fund, Leslie Manookian refers to President Ronald Reagan who stated one of his biggest fears was that over time a controlling authoritarian socialist state would be foisted upon the world under the guise of health. It is very clear that when any world leader obtains too much power, it is almost impossible for the people to reverse it. Historically, when industries obtain too much power they then prey on an unwitting public.
In the USA the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was signed into law in 1986. This provided protection from liability for injury against vaccine manufacturers. Since that time the vaccine schedule in the USA has tripled. Ms Manookian advises of the need to pay attention to history in order to understand our future and avoid repeating past mistakes.
Under the guise of public health management, WHO wants to usurup power from our nations and from us as individuals. This is why Ms Manookian started the World Freedom Declaration This is a collaborative effort of hundreds of organisations with over 75,000 signatures so far.
Please sign it and share it for others to sign. It is a tool to garner publicity and get attention from those who serve us. We can use our collective voice to demand political representation against this threat to each individual’s bodily sovereignty. To every citizen on the planet.
Lawyer and federal litigator John Titus, who has YouTube, Bitchute and Odysee channels called Best Evidence talks about rule of law, corruption, sovereignty and transparency. His presentation focuses on financial and monetary issues, describing the connection with pandemic response and WHO treaty plans.
Private companies are moving into and taking over public spaces that are traditionally reserved for the democratic process, such as health. They do this under two different guises:
- Crises, eg pandemics and emergencies are used to justify suspension of normal democratic processes.
- The need to act quickly removes the right of ordinary citizens to make decisions, instead passing the responsibility to “experts”.
This is the premise of the amended IHRs and pandemic treaty: suspend democracy and let global experts decide. Mr Titus then describes the historical context in which this action has precedent. During the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) of 2008-2009, financial “experts” were referred to by those refusing to prosecute powerbrokers on Wall Street. He shows the conflicts of interest that these so-called “experts” had, sharing power between private corporations and government positions.
Mr Titus shows evidence of similar conduct from Bill Gates, who has openly admitted a 2000% return on his vaccine investments. His conflicts of interest within WHO mean that WHO are now basically an advertising agency for vaccines regardless of the data that contradicts claims being made of safety and effectiveness. A criminal enterprise caught in criminal fraud before, Pfizer paid the largest criminal fine imposed by the United States government for any matter.
Mr Titus concludes that the US Executive Branch has worked for private corporations and banks since the GFC. Their modus operandi is to replace democratic process and rule of law by using emergencies and crises to justify all manner of undemocratic regulations, citing the authority of so-called experts who stand to gain financially and professionally. These experts advance their private interests in the name of public good whilst in fact causing public detriment.
Wall St got away with these crimes because they possess sovereign power by money creation. The pharmaceutical industry do not possess this level of power. This is our chance to get out of the World Health Organisation. Mr Titus emphasises the need to urge officials, sign petitions, and put up a fight.
Conclusion and Call to Action
The IAJD and specifically this press conference is a call to action. Mr Kruse states that it is the role of lawyers to protect peoples’ rights, peoples’ health, peoples’ democracy and the rule of law. He asks that those lawyers not yet engaged in this fight join the movement.
The plan is to engage in direct contact with those who are responsible – WHO and those with political responsibility in every nation. Confront them with information and with demands. Let them know that we will hold them responsible.
They will be held accountable on several issues. We need to know what financial contributions and participations control the WHO including any contracts with drug producers and with financial actors. They need to meet universal standards of quality control subject to an independent assessment, for PCR tests, so-called vaccines and other interventions.
Inform the public of their rights and provide them with information about what they can do, what letters they can write, and the World Freedom Declaration. Continue at country level to pursue legal actions against this evil. The PCR test is not proof of disease, and the mRNA substance mandates are illegal and harmful.
Legal actions can lead to public attention, allowing the public and media to create pressure on those responsible. We cannot afford politicians who serve as puppets of pharmaceutical and other corporations.
Anyone with questions or press requests can contact the International Alliance for Justice and Democracy at [email protected]
Watch: Press Conference on World Health Organization 75th Health Assembly
Further Information from NZDSOS and NZLSOS
Other articles about the WHO Pandemic Treaty and Internal Health Regulations amendments by the NZDSOS team including NZLSOS are listed here for ease of reference:
- Stop the Treaty, 23 May 2022
Includes an important NZLSOS article by lawyer, Kirsten Murfitt
- Cataclysmic Covid-19 Public Health Measures, 23 May 2022
- Ignore the WHO Pandemic Treaty at Your Peril, 13 May 2022
- Challenging the WHO Pandemic Treaty, 19 April 2022
- The Who and the Pandemic Preparedness Treaty, 28 March 2022
- Pandemic Treaty – Is This Dangerous for Us?, 18 March 2022