| | | |

South Africa takes a stand against WHO’s International Health Regulations

Share this article

This article is a repost with the kind permission from CHD Africa

South Africa is leading African countries in the campaign to reject the WHO facilitated amendments to the International Health Regulations 2005, and to stop the new pandemic treaty, both of which, despite the WHO’s denial, pose clear threats to health, autonomy, and national sovereignty. These controversial instruments also create enormous debt for developing countries.

The latest development in the international campaign is a notice letter collaboratively drafted by activist and attorney Shabnam Palesa Mohamed, which was served on the WHO by a member of South Africa’s parliament Steven Swart, together with three other MP’s from the African Christian Democratic Party. The letter rejects duration related amendments to the IHR, that were adopted in 2022.

The concise but detailed notice letter strongly highlights the right to public participation and the role of parliamentary oversight in decision making, enshrined in South Africa’s constitution. It also points to procedural irregularities in WHO processes. The letter gave the WHO 7 days to produce evidence of a lawful voting process on IHR amendments in 2022. The WHO failed to provide evidence.

The letter also highlights a key fact. The IHR appears to not been properly domesticated in South African law: 

“The International Health Regulations (2005), were adopted by the 58th World Health Assembly on 23 May 2005 and entered into force on 15 June 2007.

The International Health Regulations Bill, 2013, was published for comment in the South African Government Gazette (Notice 36931) on 14 October 2013 in terms of the constitutionally required public consultation process.

This Bill sought to repeal the International Health Regulations Act 28 of 1974; to incorporate the International Health Regulations 2005 into South African domestic law in terms of section 231(4) of the Constitution in order to apply the International Health Regulations in South Africa and to provide for the matters connected therewith.

As far as we are aware, this Bill was not passed by the South African Parliament, which brings the domestication of the International Health Regulations 2005 into South African law in terms of the Constitution, and any future purported amendments to the IHR 2005 into question.”

This means that current amendments and future proposed amendments to the IHR 2005 are null and void in South African law.

Swart later made a submission in parliament during which public participation, parliament’s role, and the IHR amendments were highlighted. He mentioned another MP who is supportive of ivermectin access, National Freedom Party MP Ahmed Munzoor Sheik Emam. Emam had also committed to serving the WHO with a notice of rejection in relation to IHR 2005 amendments made in 2022.

Three other key sections unique to the South African notice letter

Resources:


Further updates in South Africa’s campaign will follow. Please follow and support CHD Africa

Similar Posts

  • Where is the Video?

    Share this article

    Share this article The WHA 77 schedule for June 1st shows that Committee A was supposed to receive…

  • I Want to Stop CBDCs – What Can I Do?

    Share this article

    Many subscribers and readers of the Solari Report have asked how they can stop the implementation of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) in the U.S. and other countries. It is important to recognize that there is a great deal that each one of us can do to take action. In a highly leveraged financial system such as we have, a single individual counts for a lot. Get ready to support Financial Transaction Freedom.

  • Diet, Injections, and Injunctions

    Share this article

    After the lockdowns of 2020 and the vaccine mandates of 2021, most Americans have heard about the idea of medical freedom and many have concerns about informed consent. One in four of our countrymen say they know someone who was seriously injured or killed by the Covid vaccines. The need for informed consent in medicine is apparent. But far fewer know anything about food freedom, or why it matters. 

  • ‘Putin could switch everything off’: how cashless Sweden went too far

    Share this article

    It is the Swedish thing to do to have coffee and cake in the morning. It is, however, unusual to be doing so with a former head of Interpol. Björn Eriksson has spent much of his professional life hunting criminals, coordinating police forces and running national emergency drills. Now his chief security concern is his country’s erasure of cash…