Lockdowns are ‘colonialist’: Coalition of African scientists accuses WHO of ‘classic Western imperialism through the back door’ with sweeping new pandemic treaty

The World Health Organization (WHO) has been accused of being ‘colonialist’ over plans for a new pandemic treaty.

A coalition of African scientists fears the agreement could lead to countries being put into lockdown at the whim of the UN agency.

The WHO – heavily criticized for its handling of Covid – is considering up to 300 changes to its legally binding rulebook.

But one move by the U.N. agency, the group worries, opens the door for member states to comply with advice issued during future pandemics, such as enforcing vaccine passports and closing borders.

The Pan-African Epidemic and Pandemic Working Group argued that lockdowns were a “class-based and unscientific tool.”

It comes as six MPs wrote to the Foreign Office in May last year demanding it block any new powers that could let the WHO dictate policy and budgets in Britain. Ex-cabinet minister Esther McVey (pictured) warned that those in power would see the organisation, described by critics as China’s puppet, evolve from a ‘member-led advisory body to a health authority with coercive powers’.

It says they have caused “significant damage” to low-income countries.

Instead, African countries should be able to prioritize tackling their own major health needs, including diseases such as cholera, yellow fever and malaria, the group said.

The Coalition, which has backed MP Andrew Bridgen for his work into Covid vaccine injuries, said the plans threaten “health sovereignty” and “economic independence”.

Specifically, the group is calling for a review of the amended agreement, which gives WHO the authority to declare a disease a public health emergency of international concern, or a pandemic.

They said: ‘These new powers should not be considered.

“Instead, an Africa-sensitive approach should replace the increasingly colonialist approach of those who now control the WHO agenda.

‘The lockdown regulations, which were imposed during Covid and which continue to be reinforced in the design tools, were a class-based and unscientific tool, causing significant collateral damage to lower-income people and useless for crowded informal environments such as in urban parts of Africa.”

Reginald Oduor, senior lecturer at the Department of Philosophy, University of Nairobi, Kenya, added: “This is a continuation of classical Western imperialism coming through the back door.

‘It is health imperialism to subjugate knowledge from other parts of the world and to think that medical innovations and knowledge about Covid or other pandemics should come from Geneva or the developed countries.

‘This is why we must argue for multiple knowledge centers… Every society has the right to its own innovations.’

According to one draft of the treaty, countries would “follow WHO recommendations in their international public health response.”

It aims to prepare for the next global public health emergency and prevent a repeat of what South Africa called ‘vaccine apartheid’ – where countries had vastly unequal access to Covid vaccines and drugs .

The WHO International Health Regulations (IHR) group will agree on a package of amendments to be presented to the World Health Assembly (WHA) at the 77th World Health Assembly in May.

It comes as six MPs wrote to the Foreign Office in May last year demanding it block any new powers that could let the WHO dictate policy and budgets in Britain.

Ex-cabinet minister Esther McVey warned that those in power would see the organisation, described by critics as China’s puppet, evolve from a “member-led advisory body to a health authority with coercive powers”.

In response to the fears, the government insisted it would ‘never agree to anything that conflicts with our principles of sovereignty’.

The WHO’s initial study in January 2021, in which a group of scientists traveled to Wuhan, concluded that “all hypotheses are still on the table.” In its March 2021 report, it ranked the likelihood of four theories, with the natural origins theory considered the most likely. But it put the lab leak an “extremely unlikely path” behind the frozen food origin story. The theory that the virus was introduced via ‘cold food chain products’ – pushed by the Chinese government – ​​was instead deemed a ‘possible route’ by the UN agency

The government also says the treaty “does not contain any provision” to grant the WHO powers to impose lockdowns, mandatory quarantines or vaccines.

The agency has long been criticized for praising China’s response to Covid-19, for taking too long to declare the outbreak an international emergency and for advising countries against imposing travel bans.

The investigation into the origins of Covid, in January 2021, which saw a group of scientists travel to Wuhan, concluded that ‘all hypotheses remain on the table’.

In its March 2021 report, it then ranked the likelihood of four popular theories, judging the natural origins theory to be the most likely.

But it cast the lab leak as an “extremely unlikely path” – behind the frozen food origin story.

The director-general has since called for a new investigation, saying: ‘All hypotheses remain open and require further investigation.’

The lab leak theory, once dismissed as an outright conspiracy, has gained traction in the years since the virus first caused a global pandemic.

But no concrete evidence has ever been found to support an origins argument, leading experts to fear that the truth will never come to light.