New WHO Tracker Tool

WHO TrackerThere’s a new tool that may help to follow the work of the World Health Organization, called the WHO Tracker. The WHO Tracker has been developed as part of WHO Watch.

The WHO Tracker has been developed as a tool for following particular issues across time and across the governing body meetings. The Tracker comprises separate pages for each meeting, in each case structured around the official agenda. Under each agenda item are links to key documents, debate and policy decisions. Not all meetings and not all items have been fully linked at this time. This work is ongoing.

WHO Watch is sponsored by a group of international NGOs and social movements including the People’s Health Movement (PHM). PHM follows closely the work of WHO, through the World Health Assembly, the Executive Board and the regional committees.

PHM prepares commentaries on agenda items at WHO governing body meetings, including brief background and critical commentary. In association with Medicus Mundi International, PHM members also read statements to governing body meetings.

Read more

WHO Candidates’ Weak Words

Caution Weak WordsThe 1948 Constitution of the World Health Organization positions the WHO as the ‘guardian’ of everyone’s right to health, which makes the forthcoming election of its next Director General to be of great importance to those who strive for human rights and health justice. This is why we have been closely following the election process, and studying the final three Candidate’s positions. As the WHO process is nearing its conclusion, we are deeply dismayed by the weak words on rights and shallow slogans coming from the next Director General of WHO.

In a few weeks, a new Director General (DG) of the World Health Organization (WHO) will be elected by the representatives of the 193 governments, known as Member States, that govern this UN agency. Although we believe that a human rights-based approach (HRBA) should be the framework of all of the World Health Organization (WHO) policies and programmes, many of the Member States do not share this view on rights. This may explain why after 70 years of the WHO’s mandate to progressively realize the right to health, it has failed to do so. It also may explain why the candidates will not risk losing the potential support of these regressive Member States by proposing real actions and reforms that would advance the right to health, including steps that would make the WHO more accountable to those they serve, the folks on the ground waiting for health justice.

Unfortunately, the billions of people that are most impacted by the policies of the WHO do not have any say in this election process. Only Member States have a vote on the candidates, as well as on every other aspect of WHO policies.

A key element of the human rights-based approach is the participation of affected communities and their civil society organizations in decisions on policies, which would enable the public to be more equal partners in public health development. The WHO is missing this crucial element, and after 70 years, must change.

Read more