In the public participation process on the proposed global pandemic treaty

My colleagues in the World Council for Health work tirelessly to inspire, inform and empower people about our sovereign human rights. One of the many examples of our commitment to health and freedom is recent representations to the WHO, on their proposed global pandemic treaty. The #StopTheTreaty campaign, supported by partners and allies went viral.

Here are a selection of representations to the WHO last week:

Shabnam Palesa Mohamed for Transformative Health Justice:

Transformative Health Justice is a health advocacy non-profit organization in South Africa. We advocate for safe, effective and affordable health care, repurposed medicines, and for product safety, efficacy and affordability.

Our representation is summarized in 6 concise points:

1. Sovereignty of the African continent must be respected. This includes:

A. Natural and traditional medicine

B. Our natural immunity to C19

C. Our experience in addressing disease

2. Conflicts of interest must be declared by the the WHO, it’s funders, and its public relations and media stakeholders. This is especially because Africa is a highly contested and corrupt space for Big Pharma, which has a history of experimenting on our children without informed consent.

3. WHO must insist that Big Pharma:

A. release all injection contracts,

B. not be allowed to hold clinical or safety data back from the public, and

C. compensate people for jab and other medical injuries during C19.

Further, the WHO should not be accepting funding from Big Pharma, conflicted philanthropy investors, and related stakeholders with influence.

4. Censorship and medical apartheid or discrimination must be strongly discouraged by WHO, as they violate natural law and democratic constitutions. This is particularly obvious in South Africa, where a previously protective constitution has been subverted during the C19 chapter.

5. No undemocratic treaty can be held as legally binding by WHO, nor should sanctions be imposed against any country that decides it does not want to abide by certain or all articles in the proposed treaty, the International Health Regulations, or any other agreement related to our health.

6. Without a proper public participation process, any agreement is unconstitutional, unlawful and invalid. Therefore, the WHO is ethically and legally obliged to create a proper and robust public participation process that reaches the poor, the illiterate and those critical of the WHO.

Law and Activism Committee co-chair

WCH steering committee member

Dustin Brice for Interests of Justice:

All limitations to write in an emergency shall conform to the conditions set in the Siracusa principles

Control of the legality of emergency power by independent citizen bodies is in the public interest to prevent imbalance of power

No treaty can be binding which conferred upon who the power to issue or enforce pandemic guidance which mesa Plant the Nations constitution, written definitions and sovereign legislation

Pre-determination and punishment of misinformation with no written law defining misinformation backed by science deniers due process and is prohibited by law declared emergencies are no exception

Persecution and censorship of diversity of opinion by the world health organization, trusted news initiative, private actors or state is expressly prohibited

The WHO must immediately declare all yearly funders with full transparency and allow for independent oversight with the ability to mediately remove all conflicts of interest

Centralization of national health data, biotechnology, AI, big tech and media, poses an international security threat that must be prevented in order to protect all human rights, the human genome and health

The WHO shall not exaggerate the seriousness of the diagnosis, complicate the treatment, or artificially create alarm situation is in response to spurious interests; if found guilty the member states agree to permanently stop all funding and relationships with the world health organization

WHO must waive immunity in the event that unjustified damages arise from the use of their guidance or treaty

A democratic process should be made by the people, rather than an intergovernmental negotiating body to ensure meaningful participation.

Law and Activism Committee member

Dr Tess Lawrie for World Council for Health:

(Drafted by Law and Activism Committee)

The World Council for Health believes that good health, human rights, autonomy, national sovereignty, free speech, and right of association are central to any agreement in the interests of the people. Simultaneously, conflicts of interest, corruption and censorship are barriers to public trust.

While the WCH does not believe a pandemic treaty is necessary, nor would it truly benefit the people of our world, we are aware that the WHO intends to push through a pandemic treaty, and therefore share 16 recommendations:

A. On Awarenessinter alia:

  1. Open debate and varied perspectives and opinions must be normalised
  2. A return to traditional & scientific definition of “Pandemic” is essential
  3. Transparency on models and tests is the basic tenet of any agreement
  4. Cost benefit analysis must be made public before any recommendations

B. On Preparedness, inter alia:

  1. All conflicts of interest must be immediately disclosed to the public
  2. Documents and data relevant to decision-making must be disclosed
  3. Open and uncensored dialogue must include critical non-state actors
  4. Traditional and natural health care must be respected by the WHO.C. On Responseinter alia:
  1. Inalienable human rights and civil liberties must be respected
  2. Sovereignty of all people and nations must be unfailingly upheld
  3. Public participation in decision-making must be robust and clear
  4. The right to choose and refuse treatments or medical interventions, including access to repurposed medications, must be respected
  5. Discrimination based on medical status or choice must be rejected
  6. Mass experimentation and social engineering must be rejected
  7. States of emergency, lockdown, and emergency use authorizations are the decisions of sovereign counties, in a public participation process
  8. Restoration for harms from medical interventions must be promoted

In Conclusion: 

The current public participation process by the WHO, announced just last week, does not uphold access to information, the right to make decisions, and other civil rights democratic pillars. Nevertheless, all submissions are now part of the public record, and any valid agreement must include terms that uphold natural law, the Siracusa principles, and the Hippocratic Oath.

Steering Committee member

You can watch 2 x half days of WHO representations here:

Call to Action

According to the WHO, the next round of written and video representations of their proposed pandemic treaty happens on 16-17 June.

Meanwhile, pay close attention to impending amendments to the International Health Regulations this May, at the World Health Assembly.

Useful links include

Meanwhile, pay close attention to impending amendments to the International Health Regulations this May, at the World Health Assembly.


Public support: “I stand with WC4H and thank you for all you are doing for humanity. I sincerely hope we can find away (maybe to donate a penny/cent from every medicine sold to fund your future work) so the public have access to, independent trusted advice. Please continue to find the strength and time to persist with your fabulous work.

#TakeBackPower #CreateTheBetterWay

Thanks for reading Take Back Power with Shabnam Palesa Mohamed! Subscribe for more inspiring, informative and empowering content.

About Author