A new pandemic treaty is in the works. Countries are negotiating its terms, along with amendments to the International Health Regulations. If ready in time, the World Health Assembly will approve them in May. The deal may give the WHO power to declare global health emergencies. Countries will promise to follow WHO directives. Lockdowns, vaccine mandates, travel restrictions and more will be in the works. Critics say that the agreements will override national sovereignty because their provisions will be binding. But international law is the art of the Big Pretend.
You drive down Main Street. Cars are parked everywhere. The signs say “No Parking” but they also say, “The City does not enforce parking restrictions”. In effect there’s no rule against parking. Laws are commands imposed with the force of the state. Rules without sanctions are mere suggestions. Some people may honour the request, but others won’t. Those who disagree with the rule can safely ignore it. In domestic law, “enforceable” and “binding” are synonyms.
But not in international law, where promises are called ‘binding’ even if they are unenforceable. In the international sphere, countries are the highest authority. Nothing stands above them with the power to enforce their promises. No such courts exist. The International Court of Justice depends on the consent of the countries involved. No international police enforce its orders. The UN is a sprawling bureaucracy, but in the end, it is merely a place for countries to gather. The WHO is a branch of the UN whose mandate countries negotiate amongst themselves.
In the proposed pandemic treaty, parties are to settle disputes through negotiation. They may agree to be subject to the International Court of Justice or to arbitration. But they cannot be required to.
Yet international law jurists insist that unenforceable treaty promises can be binding. “The binding character of a norm does not depend on whether there is any court or tribunal with jurisdiction to apply it,” Daniel Bodansky, a Professor of International Law at Arizona State University, wrote in a 2016 analysis of the Paris climate agreement. “Enforcement is not a necessary condition for an instrument or norm to be legally binding.” Without this Big Pretend, international law would collapse like a house of cards on a windy beach.
All countries are sovereign. They are free to retaliate against each other for perceived wrongs, including breaches of treaty promises. They can seek to have other countries censured or expelled from the international regime. They can impose trade sanctions. They can expel ambassadors. But retaliation is not ‘enforcement’. Moreover, international relations are a delicate business. Aggrieved countries are more likely to express their disappointment in carefully crafted diplomatic language than to burn bridges.
The threat from WHO proposals come not from outside but from within. We live in a managerial age, run by a technocratic elite. Over time, they have acquired for themselves the discretion to direct society for the common good, as they declare it to be.
As journalist David Samuels puts it:
Americans now find themselves living in an oligarchy administered day-to-day by institutional bureaucracies that move in lock-step with each other, enforcing a set of ideologically-driven top-down imperatives that seemingly change from week-to-week and cover nearly every subject under the sun.
These bureaucracies regulate, license, expropriate, subsidise, track, censor, prescribe, plan, incentivise and inspect. Pandemics and public health are the most recent justifications for yet more control.
Domestic governments, not international bodies, will impose WHO recommendations on their citizens. They will pass laws and policies that incorporate those directives. Even an exasperated WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said so in a briefing this week:
There are those who claim that the pandemic agreement and [amended regulations] will cede sovereignty… and give the WHO Secretariat the power to impose lockdowns or vaccine mandates on countries… These claims are completely false… the agreement is negotiated by countries for countries and will be implemented in countries in accordance with your own national laws.
Ghebreyesus is correct. Local and national authorities will not give up their powers. To what extent international commitments will be ‘binding’ on a country depends not on international law but on that country’s own domestic laws and courts. Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, for example, provides that the Constitution, federal laws and treaties together “shall be the supreme Law of the Land”. That does not mean that treaties supersede the constitution or federal laws. Domestic legislation and policy will be required for the proposed pandemic treaty and WHO directives to be enforced on American soil. Such legislation is an exercise of sovereignty, not a repudiation of it.
The proposals are not benign. Domestic authorities seek cover for their own autocratic measures. Their promises will be called ‘binding’ even though they are not. Local officials will justify restrictions by citing international obligations. Binding WHO recommendations leave them no choice, they will say. The WHO will coordinate their imperatives as the face of global public health.
The WHO is not taking over. Instead, it will be the handmaiden for a coordinated global biomedical state. Managers hate straight lines. Diffuse, discretionary powers avoid accountability and the rule of law. The global health regime will be a tangled web. It is meant to be.
Bruce Pardy is Executive Director of Rights Probe and Professor of Law at Queen’s University. This article was first published by the Brownstone Institute.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
There’s also an increase in alcohol consumption, that can raise the risks of gout.
Methinks that’s rather a case of coincidence of consumption of alcoholic drinks and lots of junk food.
High wine consumption is linked with gout – it’s generally believed that high alcohol consumption leads to over-production of uric acid, which causes gout. Some say red wine in particular, and although my father-in-law is only a sample size of one, he has gout and no one else I know drinks more red wine…
High wine consumption is linked with gout – it’s generally believed that high alcohol consumption leads to over-production of uric acid, which causes gout.
The teetotallers will link everything to alcohol, be it dying of thirst, because of their a priori convicton that everything bad which happens to humans must be caused by it. In reality, nobody really knows what causes gout and nobody’s much interested in knowing, either. It’s a fairly harmless albeit painful disease whose symptoms can be handled with the the usual suspects medication.
What is “junk food”?
Food which should be thrown away before eating due to its atrocious quality. This applies to most of everything which can be bought in all of these street food outlets.
“The number of cases has risen by 20% in three years, with 234,000 patients admitted to hospital with gout in 2021/22, NHS Digital statistics show.”
That’s 234,000 candidates for bogus covid-19 diagnosis, then.
Might not be worth reading in full, but I like the image of the character under the headline! Reminds me of the occasion in early 2020 when he was allegedly admitted to hospital in London (St. Thomas?) with C-19. There was a report from that place as to what his weight was; not nice (the value quoted, not the publication of it!). Apart from what the Mail says, I think it is likely that being overweight can screw up one’s immune system in general. In particular, at least one of our important vitamins (D) tends to be fat prevalent.
In simple terms, being obese tends to make one more vulnerable to a range of different infections, such as the, err, common one under consideration.
I am shocked that people diagnosed with gout are hospitalised.
Agreed.
Gout is predominantly a genetic disorder caused by overproduction or reduced excretion of uric acid.
Inflammatory episodes my be triggered by alcohol, certain dietary factors, dehydration (possible with a heat wave and/or water shortage) or trauma.
In my experience outpatient diagnosis is frequently incorrect as a correct diagnosis relies on aspiration of joint fluid and the finding or monosodium urate crystals in the fluid.
Even that can sometimes give an incorrect diagnosis.
Since Covid “vaccines” have become prevalent I have seen a huge increase in presentations with acute joint swelling.
Some of these have been labelled as gout by ED staff.
I have performed multiple joint aspirations on these patients as well as other investigations, and found very few to be caused by gout.
My conclusion is that Covid “vaccines” cause inflammatory joint swelling in a proportion of patients.
I have seen no increase in gout presentations.
It is very rare for a patient to be admitted to hospital for gout.
Many thanks for this in-depth explanation.
Very interesting. A friend gets gout and he doesn’t drink alcohol but has to put up with all the comments that go with being diagnosed.
My first post so be gentle with me.
My first cynical thought was that, as gout is a consequence of excess purine intake (port and red wine, but also red meat and, curiously, fructose – https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16234313/) this story would be yet another flag-waver for the insect diet. I was gratified to find this – as yet uncensored – little gem which notes the high levels of purine in several edible insect species. https://www.wageningenacademic.com/doi/abs/10.3920/JIFF2018.0023
While still playing into the pockets of Big Pharma ref drug based treatment options, the best, cheapest and most effective solution is the phrase ‘oi lard*rse, stop stuffing your face with cr*p and get some exercise’.
Excellent first post so please keep them coming.
Pleased to welcome you aboard.
Thanks!
Seconded!
Gout may be caused by excess histamine consumption and/or production. Foods high in histamine include prawns, seafood, oily fish eg salmon, cured meats, aged cheeses, avocado, pickles, wine, sherry and port, and foods which trigger histamine production include egg whites eg in meringues and macaroons, chocolate, citrus fruits, horseradish, shellfish, strawberries, and some nuts …. basically my favourite foods ( when not eating gluten, at which times my favourite food is pizza!
), and traditionally central to the diet of the rich.
I did think that the swollen and tingling toes said to be part of covid symptoms at one point might be something else.
A very powerful instant anti-histamine is vitamin C, which is a relief! ( I had an attack recently, with the odd nausea it can cause too, after eating a bit more sashimi, seafood, and avocado than I’m used to, and drinking plum wine and sherry with them )
Lemons are very useful as they are usually much richer in vitamin C than in their histamine triggers. And high-strength soluble vitamin C tablets will also usually work to relieve symptoms.
Some people are more sensitive to/prone to histamine “storms” than others.
Histamine is essentially an inflammatory reaction, and can be exacerbated by stress …
Sunshine , and Vitamin D, on the other hand help to down-regulate the immune system’s tendency to inflammation … A lot of people may have lost out on their usual doses of Vitamin D over the last 2 years. ( Rich people used to avoid the sun because white skin was prized as sign that didn’t have to work ( outside )).
Interestingly, ( to me anyway
), in the context of covid, “long covid”, and the changes in behaviour and diet that lockdowns caused, ( less time outdoors and different foods eaten because at home ), excess of histamine consumption and/or production can cause not only the swollen, red, sore fingers and toes and stiff aching joints which may be diagnosed as gout, but also the following:
Chronic inflammation
Tingling/numbness in hands and feet
Difficulty regulating body temperature and an increased tendency to sweating
Hives, rashes, itchy skin, flushing
( Quite frightening ) racing heart/heart palpitations
Low blood pressure
Difficulty/obstructed breathing, sinus issues, bronchitis
Post-nasal drip, persistent throat clearing, weepy eyes
Digestive disturbances/distress
Headaches, dizziness
Anxiety/feelings of dread
Insomnia
Chronic fatigue
Thyroid disruption and all that can lead to; energy and mood disorders among other things
Histamine has a systemic effect on the body. And lockdowns may have had a significant effect on people’s levels of histamine by keeping them indoors, ( out of the sun, with no holidays to top up, with resulting loss of vitamin D which would normally keep inflammation in check ), and by perhaps encouraging increased consumption of the higher-histamine foods which are usually the most expensive or only present in small quantities in restaurant dishes but somewhat cheaper/more affordable when bought in supermarkets.
With adequate exposure to ultra violet B from the Sun being our source of power to create our own vitamin D. Otherwise, we need supplement it via our diet. Not going out enough can therefore be contradictory to good health. Worth noting that other animals that spend time outside, such as grazing the fields, do the same thing – even through their fur, which UV B penetrates.
Did Saint Boris and his merry men expect a nation in perfect health, after he literally criminalised exercise? The consequences of the hallowed lockdowns are coming in thick and fast, just as we said they would.
As for gout: Hyancinth Bucket (lockdown snitch personified) once said “gout comes from an excess of good living”, when she made Richard pretend he had gout, instead of a mere fungus infection.
“Over-Eating and Lack of Exercise During Lockdown Has Triggered Huge Increase…” in illnesses, both physical and mental across much of the UK population.
It is important that the correct perspective is taken when the health of the community at large is under discussion.
Once you accept that many other health issues could be substituted for ‘gout’ it is nigh on impossible to refute the conclusion that all of this is intentional.
Stating the obvious but the government (and opposition) are clueless (or ambivalent) about health issues. Do they even have a policy on orthomolecular (nutritional) medicine? Of course they won’t, it’s not profitable enough to them.
But they probably have shares in the elastane/spandex/Lycra ® industry?
Reminds me of The Fast Show and ‘Does my bum look big in this?’
So nobody thought that sitting around, doing nothing but bingeing on delivered food, whilst boozing to excess would have a negative impact on their health? Truly, common sense is not very common.