WHO rejects US charge it is violating countries' sovereignty
"Our job is to provide evidence-based recommendations and guidelines, and to support countries to protect and improve the health of their populations,"
WHO
chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told reporters.
"But how or whether countries implement that advice has always been and always will be up to them, based on their national guidelines and rules."
In 2024, the WHO's 194 member states approved by consensus a range of amendments to the
International Health Regulations
(IHR), which were first adopted in 1969.
The changes were deemed necessary after the
Covid-19 pandemic
exposed flaws in the system, with countries failing to jolt into action when the United Nations health body sounded the regulations' highest available alarm in January 2020.
The amended rules introduced a new, higher "pandemic emergency" level of alarm, aimed to kick in before a full-blown pandemic develops, spurring member states to take "rapid" coordinated action.
But last week, US President Donald Trump's administration, which is in the process of withdrawing from the WHO itself, rejected the amendments.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy said that the changes "risk unwarranted interference with our national sovereign right to make health policy".
"We will put Americans first in all our actions and we will not tolerate international policies that infringe on Americans' speech, privacy or personal liberties," they said in a joint statement.
Tedros stressed that the amendments were "proposed, negotiated and adopted by our member states".
"WHO has no authority to tell countries what to do. We cannot impose travel bans, lockdowns, vaccine mandates or any other type of measure. Nor do we seek to," he insisted.
"That is clearly laid out in our founding document, the WHO Constitution."
The WHO's chief legal officer Steven Solomon meanwhile told the press conference that "less than a handful" of countries had rejected the amendments ahead of a July 19 deadline.
"It's now clear that the 2024 IHR amendments will apply to the overwhelming majority of the 196 countries that are party to the IHRs," he told the press conference.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
18 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Issue guidelines within three months for safe collection, transport of medical samples, Delhi HC tells Centre
In a move that could significantly improve diagnostic accuracy and patient safety, the Delhi High Court has directed the Union government to notify long-pending minimum standards in the collection of medical samples or specimens by laboratories and collection centres, and guidelines to transport them, within the next three months. The order, if implemented, could help curb inaccuracy in test reports, especially when the samples are collected from the home of a patient, experts said. It could also reduce unsafe handling of biological specimens, and treatment errors caused by degraded samples, potentially saving lives, they added. Currently, India lacks specific regulations governing how medical samples, such as blood, urine, or swabs, are collected, stored, and transported to diagnostic laboratories. This regulatory gap has led to widespread inconsistencies, particularly with private labs and home sample collection services that operate without strict oversight. Wrong results 'Patients often assume their test results are scientifically reliable. But when samples are exposed to extreme heat or delayed in reaching the lab, the entire result can become invalid — without anyone realising it,' Dr. Rohit Jain, who had filed a public interest litigation (PIL) on the issue in 2019, said. 'Wrong results lead to wrong treatment. That's not just unethical — it's dangerous,' Dr. Jain said. The High Court, while hearing Dr. Jain's plea on July 18, recorded the Union Health Ministry's assurance that the draft minimum standards, which the Ministry said had already been approved by the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), were in advanced stages of being notified. The plea, filed through advocate Mrinmoi Chatterjee, stated that despite the directions of the Delhi HC in January 2023, no guidelines on minimum standards for sample collection had been formulated by the Centre. The Health Ministry, in its latest status report to the court, said the draft minimum standards were currently undergoing legal vetting by the Legislative Department of the Union Ministry of Law and Justice. The Ministry said four expert sub-committees had been formed with specialists in pathology, biochemistry, haematology, and microbiology to formulate 'minimum standards for sample collection and sample transport policy'. Once approved by the National Council for Clinical Establishments, after public consultation, the process of publishing the guidelines in the The Gazette of India would be initiated. The Ministry additionally said two guidelines issued by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR)-National Institute of Virology (NIV) during the COVID-19 pandemic were currently in place which, when read in conjunction with the draft minimum standards, offer comprehensive laboratory guidance in maintaining biosafety and ensuring quality specimen handling. But Dr. Jain remains sceptical. 'These draft standards have been stuck for two years. Meanwhile, nothing has changed on the ground,' he said. 'There are aggregators and collection agents who have no medical training, collecting samples from people's homes. They don't refrigerate them, don't process them in time, and no one is tracking how long it takes before the sample reaches the lab,' Dr. Jain said, when asked why private laboratories should self-regulate. According to him, there are well-established scientific windows within which samples must be analysed —sometimes within 30 to 60 minutes of collection. 'In Delhi's 45°C heat, a delay of even a few hours can completely distort test results. But the government has no binding standard for this. So why would private labs regulate themselves?' he said. The ICMR has issued specific guidelines for transporting specimens related to high-risk pathogens and samples for COVID-19, but those, he said, were limited in scope and not enforceable across all clinical establishments. 'Lab test results influence over 70% of treatment decisions globally. When they are wrong, they harm patients and erode trust in the medical system,' Dr. Jain added. 'There is no law specifically [for sample collection and transport], which is why this petition was filed. We want guidelines to be released by the government,' Alok Ahuja, former Professor of Pathology, National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories, and National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers, told The Hindu. 'The quality of samples must be maintained and guidelines must be instituted. To have a law is the need of the hour,' he added. 'I am very happy that the court has been very positive to the demands of the pathologist that a law must be instituted,' Dr. Ahuja said.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
18 minutes ago
- First Post
US condemns Hong Kong's arrest bounties targeting overseas pro-democracy figures
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio condemned Hong Kong's issuance of arrest bounties for 19 overseas pro-democracy activists, calling it 'transnational repression' and vowing that the Trump administration will defend American freedoms. read more US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Saturday condemned Hong Kong's offer of rewards for any information leading to the arrest of a select list of overseas activists, including some based in the United States. 'The extraterritorial targeting of Hong Kongers who are exercising their fundamental freedoms is a form of transnational repression,' Rubio said in a statement. 'We will not tolerate the Hong Kong government's attempts to apply its national security laws to silence or intimidate Americans or anyone on US soil.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Hong Kong police on Friday announced bounties for information leading to the arrest of 19 overseas activists, accusing them of national security crimes. Police said the activists were involved in what they called the 'subversive' Hong Kong Parliament – a pro-democracy non-governmental organization established in Canada. A reward of HK$200,000 ($25,500) each was offered for 15 of the activists, while the four others were already wanted for HK$1 million, the statement said. 'With this new round of arrest warrants and bounties, the Hong Kong government continues to erode the autonomy that Beijing itself promised to the people of Hong Kong following the 1997 handover,' Rubio said. 'Freedom of speech and political discourse are core American values, which the Trump administration will continue to defend.'
Indian Express
18 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Hong Kong issues arrest warrants for 19 overseas activists accused of ‘subversion'; US reacts
The United States has criticised Hong Kong authorities for issuing arrest warrants for 19 pro-democracy activists based overseas. The move marks the largest number of such warrants issued under the city's national security law. The activists are accused of subversion for their involvement in an unofficial group known as the 'Hong Kong Parliament'. Hong Kong police allege that the group aimed to challenge the authority of the Chinese and Hong Kong governments. Several of the individuals are already subject to earlier warrants, and police say further action may follow. The 19 individuals are accused of being involved in the 'Hong Kong Parliament', an unofficial pro-democracy group that authorities claim sought to subvert state power. The group is said to have organised a mock election and promoted the idea of self-determination for Hong Kong, including plans to draft a new constitution. The Hong Kong police allege that these activities were attempts to unlawfully overthrow the government. The charges fall under the national security law imposed by Beijing in 2020 following large-scale protests in 2019. Police said anyone supporting, funding or participating in the group could also face legal consequences. Among those named are businessman Elmer Yuen, political commentator Victor Ho, and activists Johnny Fok and Tony Choi. These four were already subject to previous arrest warrants, each carrying a reward of HK$1 million (approximately £95,000). The other 15 individuals are also facing new warrants, with authorities offering HK$200,000 (£19,000) for information leading to their arrests. Some of them were reportedly involved in organising or running in the unofficial election, or taking oaths as councillors of the unofficial 'parliament'. One of those listed, Feng Chongyi, a professor at the University of Technology Sydney, dismissed the allegations. 'They've got the power, they've got the influence want to control everything even overseas,' he told The Guardian. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Reuters: 'We will not tolerate the Hong Kong government's attempts to apply its national security laws to silence or intimidate Americans or anyone on US soil.' He also said the move showed how the Hong Kong government 'continues to erode the autonomy that Beijing itself promised to the people of Hong Kong following the 1997 handover'. The UK's Foreign and Home Secretaries issued a joint statement, quoted in The Guardian, calling the warrants 'another example of transnational repression' and saying they damaged Hong Kong's international standing. 'The UK will not tolerate attempts by foreign governments to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics overseas,' they said. Australia strongly objects to Hong Kong authorities issuing arrest warrants for pro-democracy advocates in Australia. Freedom of expression and assembly are essential to our democracy. — Senator Penny Wong (@SenatorWong) July 26, 2025 Australia's foreign minister Penny Wong also objected, writing on X that 'freedom of expression and assembly are essential to our democracy'. She added: 'We have consistently expressed our strong objections to China and Hong Kong on the broad and extraterritorial application of Hong Kong's national security legislation, and we will continue to do so.' In response to the criticism, China's embassy in the UK said the British government was interfering in internal affairs. 'China urges the UK to abandon its colonial mentality, stop interfering in Hong Kong affairs and stop shielding criminals,' it said in a statement quoted by The Guardian. Hong Kong police reminded the public that national security offences carry extraterritorial effect. In a statement, they said those who turn themselves in or help investigations may be considered for reduced punishment. (With inputs from The Guardian and Reuters)
