Pandemic Treaty: WHO’s Attempt At Full Control Of All Aspects Of Any Pandemic It Declares

Pandemic Treaty is WHO’s attempt to control all aspects of any pandemic it declares

Rhoda Wilson

Last Week, Brownstone Institute published a commentary on the draft Pandemic Agreement that will be put before next week’s 78th World Health Assembly for adoption.

Although most of the Pandemic Agreement is non-binding and steeped in language such as “may,” “where appropriate,” and “when mutually agreed,” there is one theme that comes through: the World Health Organisation is positioning itself to control all aspects of any pandemic it declares.

From research and development to declaring a pandemic and determining the response, to vaccines and global supply chains, the World Health Organisation is seeking to be in sole control of it all.

Please note: The Pandemic Agreement has been called various names over the years.  It has also been referred to as the Pandemic Treaty, Pandemic Accord and WHO Convention Agreement + (“WHO CA+”). 

The following is a summary of the essay ‘Commentary on the WHO’s Draft Pandemic Agreement: Pointless Verbiage’ by Thi Thuy Van Dinh and David Bell as published by Brownstone Institute on 8 May 2025.  The commentary focuses on selected draft provisions that seem to be unclear, questionable, or potentially problematic.

Background

In addition to amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (“IHR”) adopted last year, the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) has been developing a draft Pandemic Agreement (“PA”) for three years.  The two instruments complement each other.  As Thi Thuy Van Dinh and David Bell noted:

The [PA] text should be considered in the context of the 2024 amendments to the IHR that are scheduled to enter into force for States Parties who do not reject them by 19 July 2025. These amendments already set up provisions and mechanisms for the highly profitable pandemic industry, by obligating States to strengthen their surveillance and reporting capacity for potential pathogens, providing [WHO’s Director-General] with sole power to declare an emergency based purely on perception of risk, and then open a process leading to recommendations for lockdown-related measures and rapid mass vaccination.

The PA and IHR amendments aim to centralise the management of pandemics and pandemic preparedness in the WHO.  

To promote its pandemic preparedness agenda, WHO and the global health industry have engaged in a campaign of misrepresentation and confusion.  “Countries and the media have been provided with a series of reports shown to greatly exaggerate the available evidence and citations on the risk of pandemics occurring, exaggerate expected mortality (mostly based on Medieval data), and exaggerate the expected return on investment,” Brownstone Institute said. 

In 2024, the IHR amendments were rushed to a vote at the 77th World Health Assembly (“WHA”), less than 48 hours after negotiations finished, which was a violation of the WHO’s own procedural requirements, and the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body was mandated to finish its work on the PA as soon as possible.

It’s important to note that the PA and IHR amendments are not the only global pandemic-related instruments in place:

… pandemic instruments [other than the PA] are already in place – the IHR amendments, the WHO’s Bio-Hub (International Pathogen Surveillance Network) and Medical Countermeasures Platform, the World Bank’s Pandemic Fund, and the 100 Days to Vaccine initiative. The PA is some additional icing on the pandemic cake, and perhaps a support for bruised egos and an attempt to prove that countries don’t agree with the United States’ withdrawal. 

The draft PA was agreed on 16 April 2025, and is ready for consideration by the 78th WHA, despite the United States, the WHO’s largest contributor, having walked away from the negotiation process.

The language of the agreement contradicts previous WHO understanding and public health norms.  It promotes “whole-of-government” and “whole-of-society” approaches rather than proportionate measures that minimise societal disruption and long-term harm, and ignores the basic policy requirement of considering resource allocations against other competing priorities.

The agreement prioritises commodity equity over health equity, which is detrimental to health outcomes, and contributes to the building of a pandemic industry that is heavily funded with an apparent low requirement for evidence, leading to wealth concentration and inequality.

The architecture and functioning of the PA’s new governing body, the COP, may imitate the setting of other controversial international treaties, such as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (“UNFCCC”), “arguably the most dishonest, hypocritical framework ever established.”

More...

WHO Promotes Farrar, Fauci Ally and Architect of CV Mass Vaccination Policies