> The WHO proposes that the term ‘with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons’ be deleted from the text, replacing them with ‘equity, coherence, inclusivity,’ ... The underlying equality of individuals is removed, and rights become subject to a status determined by others based on a set of criteria that they define. This entirely upends the prior understanding of the relationship of all individuals with authority, at least in non-totalitarian states. It is a totalitarian approach to society, within which individuals may act only on the sufferance of others who wield power outside of legal sanction; specifically a feudal relationship, or one of monarch-subject without an intervening constitution.
[1] 2023 draft of 2023 IHR amendments, https://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/index.html
[2] 2023 draft of 2025 treaty, https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/who-zero-draft-international-...
The best references are the primary WHO source documents. A better source of analysis than Brownstone is needed. An older (May 2022) analysis was published by an EU law journal, https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-far-reaching-us-proposals-to-am...
> ..amendments to Article 12 IHR will both considerably extend the executive powers of the WHO Director-General to declare global emergency-like situations and centralise this power further by removing the need to consult and find agreement with the respective state party ... if WHO’s powers are extended in this way, is there a need to also answer the question quis custodiet ipsos custodes (who guards the guards?), and to thus set up mechanisms ensuring that WHO complies with its obligations under the IHR and its Constitution, as well as its responsibilities for human rights deriving from customary international human rights law?
HN ranking for this story, https://hnrankings.info/34795036/