A now well-known member of the European Parliament with expertise on the World Health Organization’s (WHO) pandemic treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) warned of their potential threats to democracy and individual rights.
“In May, if they are adopted, democracy will be sidelined,” said Rob Roos, a Dutch member of the European Parliament.
Roos made his remarks to American and international COVID-19 experts during a roundtable discussion on Monday. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-WI, led the event.
“In the event the WHO decides to declare a pandemic,” Roos continued,
experts believe the WHO could then in practice impose lockdowns and force medical interventions and detailed medical protocols. Such a one-size-fits-all response to a pandemic crisis is foolish in geographical zones characterized by firstly, different parameters, and it is of course, totally undemocratic. Instead of a central bureaucratic process, we need local democratic decision-making. WHO cannot be trusted at all. It is funded by China, by Big Pharma, and by … philanthropists – I call them oligarchs, by the way.
Roos shared his experience amid discussion concerning how federal health agencies in the United States joined with a “COVID Cartel” consisting of Big Pharma, the establishment media, and Big Tech to engage in censorship and a coverup of the dangers of both the COVID shots and the lockdowns and masking directives.
Roos, Johnson explained, “garnered worldwide attention” in October 2022 when he pointedly asked Pfizer international executive Janine Small during a committee hearing of the European Parliament: “Was the Pfizer COVID vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market?”
In response to Roos’ direct question, Small admitted her company did not test its COVID mRNA shot for its ability to prevent transmission of the virus before it was placed on the market. “No,” she said, “we had to really move at the speed of science to really understand what is taking place in the market.”
Roos explained: “On December 1, 2021, the 194 members of the World Health Organization agreed to move quickly on a treaty, agreement, or other international instruments on future pandemics.”
“The power of the WHO, and, in particular, the power of the director general, to monitor, to coordinate, and to direct would be significantly expanded,” he continued. “The European Union is pushing for a legally binding pandemic treaty, but that would require a two thirds majority here in the U.S. Senate. Negotiations are ongoing.”
While Roos speculated the pandemic treaty would not likely pass worldwide, he expressed significant concern about the “more than 300 amendments” to the IHR “that were originally submitted by the Biden administration, and they will be subject to a vote by the General Assembly of the WHO at the end of May.”
Roos explained the difference between the pandemic treaty and the amendments to the IHR, noting the danger of the amendments is that they would not need ratification by national government bodies, as is the case with treaties:
These amendments would not have to be ratified by any national parliaments, thus enabling the WHO to circumvent national democracy. Thereby, they form the true, imminent danger to freedom worldwide … [A]s we can see from the original amendments, if adopted, they will already give the WHO a leading, convening, and coordinating role in the operational aspects of an emergency response to a pandemic. So, in short, the pandemic treaty is indeed worse. But the amendments are the true imminent danger and the WHO seems to be in a hurry.
Roos explained that, in May 2022, “two significant changes to the procedure of adoption” were voted upon, one reducing “from the original 24 months to 12 months for the entry into force,” and a second, a reduction from 18 to 10 months in “the period for rejection or expressing reservations” to the IHR amendments.
“The vote for this change of the IHR was performed in violation of the WHO constitution, due to lack of a proof of consent,” he asserted. “There was no vote and no record of who was present. With other words, basic procedural rules for the correct formation of vote have been violated. The democratic process has been sabotaged.”
Roos said that, despite his submission of a letter objecting to the procedure used, he believes “something like an illegal procedural change” will not stop the WHO general assembly from adopting the Biden amendments to the IHR.
“There are enormous conflicts of interest,” he added. “Further amendments threatening free speech and seeking to increase censorship of differing opinions, potentially transforming our nations into totalitarian-like states.”
“Conclusion,” he warned: “Defenders of freedom on both sides of the Atlantic need to stop these amendments from coming to pass.”
