top of page

Campaign update #3 24.10.23

Updated: Nov 24, 2023

The painstaking US researcher, James Roguski, has been watching proceedings of the WHO in Geneva and discovered a new draft WHO document on its agenda for 'World Health'.

Clearly the goalposts have been moved. Their recent decisions water down previous drafts but, as is clear both from a joint WHO/UN meeting on 20 September and from other recent WHO documents, they are still bent on getting agreement for most of their pandemic plans by their 77th World Health Assembly in Geneva on May 27th next year..

The relatively short 29-page document is marked 'Provisional', 'Advance' and 'Unedited,' but gives us the direction of travel for the WHO. It is very significant.

Why has this appeared so suddenly – and what has changed from previous proposals?

There has been mounting alarm and opposition from many quarters to the WHO's previous 'power grab' proposals, not least from the 11 member states, including Russia, which have rejected the WHO's totalitarian aspirations.

Another significant issue has emerged. Some member states have signalled that they doubt that the required agreement on the way forward can be reached ahead of a critical WHO meeting in January. The problem for the WHO is that Article 55 of the International Health Regulations legally requires a minimum consultation period of four months to allow each nation to consider the draft agreement. If no agreement is reached, the WHO must wait at least another year before they can get their pandemic proposals approved.

But, as Roguski has revealed on his website [ and], top WHO officials are engaging in jiggery-pokery to try to get round the four-month-rule.

The draft, dated 16th October, which appears to be genuine, is headed:


Negotiating text of the WHO convention, agreement or other international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response (Pandemic Agreement). Here are some significant major changes:

NO TREATY (Articles 28-30)

The WHO has abandoned the term ‘Treaty’, substituting vague allusions to an ‘Accord', ‘Agreement’ or even ‘Convention’ – important because informal accords are difficult to legally enforce in international law. But, as one comment put it: “It really doesn't matter what the details are. A convention is designed to trick nations into agreeing to stick their foot into the trap by agreeing to let other people ‘work out the details’ later.”


The previous deadline of December 1st 2023 has disappeared and is replaced only by a call for ‘agreement’ by January.


States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the general principles of international law, the sovereign right to legislate and to implement legislation in pursuance of their health policies.

On the face of it this looks like good news, but that very much depends on the outcome of the 77th World Health Assembly in May.


A clause in the previous Agreement document had quietly erased this essential point about preserving fundamental human rights in any pandemic, but now has returned under this Article. This is welcome.


Our campaign continues no matter what the final text of a new accord emerges from this draft document. We will continue via our petition cards to inform King Charles that he must take action if our government should ever agree to unelected and unaccountable organisations such as the WHO and WEF making decisions which might infringe our sovereignty.

PTK has received very positive mention from, among others, the HEART (Christian newspaper); UK Column News; Stand In The Park groups; the White Rose and TCW Defending Freedom. We received our first batch of 10,000 petition postcards – all individually numbered – on July 14th. As I write on October 23rd, 100 days into our campaign, over 16,000 cards have been bought and we are just about to order our third batch. Our campaign material has informed many new people about the threat posed by the WHO power grab – and the message is spreading well from person to person. We need to keep up the pressure; there is now evidence that determined resistance to the WHO’s totalitarianism is working.

Order your cards direct from us here…

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under the omnipotent moral busybodies” – C S Lewis.


Recent Posts

See All

Serious Problems Remain:

A Complete Guide to the New Draft Amendments to the WHO International Health Regulations by Dr David Bell and Dr. Thi Thuy Van Dinh. PTK's Graham Wood writes: "They have obviously worked hard to analy


bottom of page