Is WHO Planning To Take Control Of Internet?!

Is the WHO (World Health Organization) planning to take control of the Internet, for the “benefit of humanity”?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : WHO Plans To Take Control Of Internet!

People are sharing an article by NewsPunch, which claims that the WHO (World Health Organization) is planning to take control of the Internet, for the “benefit of humanity”!

Here is an excerpt of the very long article, so please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

WHO Moves Forward With Plans To Take Total Control of the Internet ‘For the Benefit of Humanity’

The World Health Organization (WHO) this week held a meeting to advance the international pandemic treaty — a legally binding instrument that will grant the global health agency total control over the internet to censor anything it deems to be “false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation”.

Read more : Is Biden Admin signing over US sovereignty to WHO?!

 

Truth : WHO Is NOT Planning To Take Over Internet!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS about the World Health Organization – WHO, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : NewsPunch Is A Fake News Website

Like Real Raw News, NewPunch is a FAKE NEWS website that capitalises on making shocking but fake stories to generate page views and money.

It was founded as Your News Wire in 2014, before being rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news spread on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should NEVER share anything from NewsPunch. Here are some of its fake stories that I personally debunked earlier:

Fact #2 : WHO Member States Want To Amend IHR

This claim is based on WHO member state discussions in 2022, to amend existing International Health Regulations to strengthen the world’s preparedness against future global pandemics.

The International Health Regulations (IHR) were first adopted by member states in 1969, empowering the WHO to monitor global diseases. Those regulations have since been revised over the years, including in 2005 – after the SARS outbreak.

On 1 December 2021, world leaders agreed to kickstart the process to draft and negotiate an agreement or convention to “strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response“.

The proposed recommendations came from WHO member states, and not WHO itself. Among the more than 200 recommendations on how to better prepare for the next pandemic were:

  • sharing of data and genomic sequences on emerging viruses
  • a plan for equitable vaccine distribution
  • a ban on wildlife markets
  • incentives for reporting new viruses or variants

In other words – this agreement is being formulated by WHO member states, and not the WHO itself.

Recommended : Did WHO Recommend Permanent Use Of Face Mask?!

Fact #3 : WHO Is Not Planning To Control Internet

If you read the zero draft of the proposed WHO agreement, you will realise that the WHO is not planning to control the Internet. This is explicitly stated in Article 17, which refers to “Parties” that are the member states.

The Parties commit to increase science, public health and pandemic literacy in the population, as well as access to information on pandemics and their effects, and tackle false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation, including through promotion of international cooperation.

As you can see, under the agreement, each individual country will commit to increase KNOWLEDGE about science and public health, as well as combat “false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation”.

Not only does the article clearly state that it is up to each country (not the WHO) to implement its policies, it does not mention anything about controlling the Internet.

The only people who need to worry about Article 17 of this proposed WHO agreement are those who peddle “false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation”.

Fact #4 : No One Can “Take Over” The Internet

The Internet is not some kind of organisation that the WHO can “take over”, even if it wants to. The Internet is a global system of networks, literally a “network of networks” connecting the networks in each country to each other.

Until today, there is no centralised control of the Internet – no one sets the rules or policies, or even technical implementations. It is up to each country to adopt its own policies, although to ensure interoperability, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) manages the domain name system (DNS), while the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) helps to standardise and improve technical aspects of the Internet.

Due to its autonomous nature, no one can control the Internet, never mind take over control. Individual countries and organisations can control its own networks, limiting or filtering access as they wish, but they cannot do so for other networks.

Fact #4 : Many Countries Do NOT Want A Binding Treaty

The claim that this is a binding treaty is, currently, false.

While the European Union, Britain, Indonesia and Kenya have proposed that the changes be adopted in the form of a binding treaty, the United States, India and Brazil opposed that idea.

The EU proposed the treaty and is its biggest backer, with support from Britain, Indonesia, Kenya and others.

The United States will take part in the talks but has opposed a binding treaty. India and Brazil have also voiced reservations.

With so many member countries involved, securing agreement is likely to be tricky.

Recommended : Did Joe Biden Fire Over 200 Marines For Not Taking Vaccine?!

Fact #6 : Future WHO Agreement May Not Be Binding

If you download and read the zero draft, you will realise that the WHO is still calling it a “convention, agreement, or other international instruments“, clearly showing that member countries have not decided whether they want it to be binding or otherwise.

In the third point noted on the very first page of the draft, it was even pointed out that this is just a draft that is being used for “commencing negotiations“, and that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed“.

The INB (Intergovernmental Negotiating Body) further agreed that the zero draft would be considered at its fourth meeting as a basis for commencing negotiations at that meeting, it being understood that the zero draft will be without prejudice to the position of any delegation and following the principle that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”.

So it is ludicrous for anyone who read the first page of the zero draft to claim that this is a binding treaty.

Fact #7 : WHO Agreement Must Be Ratified By Member Countries

The claim that the proposed WHO agreement will be voted on by “mostly unelected diplomats” is nonsense.

First of all, the agreement was drafted and amended by member countries themselves. The WHO is only facilitating this agreement. It is not the one creating the agreement.

Secondly, even after member countries agree on a final WHO agreement, it must be approved and adopted by each individual country. This is clearly stated in Article 33(1) with my emphasis in bold:

The WHO CA+ shall be subject to ratification, acceptance, approval or accession by States, and to formal confirmation or accession by regional economic integration organizations. It shall be open for accession from the day after the date on which the WHO CA+ is closed for signature. Instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval, formal confirmation or accession shall be deposited with the Depositary.

Recommended : Did WHO Boss Dr. Tedros Refuse COVID-19 Vaccine?!

Fact #8 : All Treaties Require US Senate Ratification

The move by Republican Senators to introduce a bill that would require the WHO treaty to be approved by two-thirds of the Senate is nothing more than political drama, because it is already the law of the land.

The US Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to approve, by a two-thirds vote or more, all international treaties (binding agreements) negotiated by the executive branch.

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;

In other words, the bill by Republican senators is irrelevant political theatre. If the WHO agreement is a binding treaty, the US Constitution already requires two-thirds of the US Senate to ratify it.

Please help us fight fake news – SHARE this article, and SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Leave a ReplyCancel reply