Challenges filed against state and federal universities in Katsina State, Nigeria, for “indefinitely prohibiting” Christian fellowship and worship on campus.
Seguir leyendoChallenging Nigeria university bans against Christian fellowship on campus
Revised WHO Pandemic Agreement draft still implies “free speech is a threat to public health” as negotiations resume today
- Updated negotiating text for legally binding agreement requires states to cooperate in “preventing” misinformation and disinformation
- As final “two-week negotiating marathon” starts today, ADF International advocates for the removal of language detrimental to free speech
GENEVA (18 March 2024) – Member States resume negotiations today at the World Health Organization on the final draft of the Pandemic Agreement. The previous draft of the legally binding text received worldwide criticism for potentially enabling government crackdowns on free speech in the name of pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.
If adopted in its current form, the Pandemic Agreement would obligate parties to “cooperate, in accordance with national laws, in preventing misinformation and disinformation”, granting individual states the discretion to define which information fits within these categories, and how far they could go in censoring alleged mis- or disinformation.
The final text is anticipated to be adopted in May and would serve as a critical tool for combating future pandemic threats.
“The revised negotiating text for the WHO Pandemic Agreement continues to misrepresent the human right to freedom of expression as a threat to public health. States have a duty to guarantee access to transparent, timely, and accurate information, especially during health emergencies. This, however, does not grant governments a license to censor lawful speech under the pretext of shielding the public from information arbitrarily labeled as ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation’, warns Giorgio Mazzoli, Director of UN Advocacy with ADF International.
“The revised negotiating text for the WHO Pandemic Agreement continues to misrepresent the human right to freedom of expression as a threat to public health“
Treaty will serve as a blueprint for future pandemics
While the updated draft of the Pandemic Agreement retains nebulous and undefined language on mis- and disinformation, it has removed the mandate for states to “manage” so-called “infodemics”. The term was loosely defined as including, inter alia, “too much information” during a disease outbreak causing “confusion” as well as “mistrust” in health authorities, irrespective of the information’s accuracy.
Human rights advocates have welcomed this revision, but emphasize that more must be done to align the provisions of the WHO Pandemic Agreement with global legal standards protecting freedom of expression.
“Freedom of expression, including the right to seek and receive information, is essential to ensure scrutiny and accountability over critical public health decisions. Lacking free access to information, people are unable to assess the lawfulness and effectiveness of the actions undertaken by authorities,” continued Mazzoli.
“If adopted in its present form, the WHO Pandemic Agreement would set a dangerously low standard of regard for freedom of expression. Any government could refer to its obligations under the treaty to unduly restrict free speech in the name of preventing alleged misinformation or disinformation among the population”, he added.
Next steps: final negotiations and adoption
The current updated text will serve as the basis for negotiations scheduled for 18-28 March 2024. Negotiations on this revised draft are expected to result in a consensus text, whose final adoption is anticipated to take place at the World Health Assembly at its 77th Session in May 2024.
Considering its importance and binding nature, the process for negotiating the text – which began in March 2023 – has been exceptionally fast compared to typical timelines. However, the slower-than-expected pace of negotiations has prompted some Member States to question the feasibility of adopting the agreement in May. Once adopted, the Pandemic Agreement will enter into force after it has been ratified by forty countries.
“Everyone agrees that life is precious and that states have an interest in protecting public health. But some of the most grave and systematic human rights abuses of the last century unfolded during public emergencies and we must be vigilant to protect hard-won rights – especially in times of crisis. When it comes to vague and undefined concepts such as “misinformation” or “disinformation”, the currently proposed cure is far worse than the disease,” Mazzoli concluded.
Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only
Organismo internacional exige respuesta del gobierno mexicano sobre diputado sancionado y censurado por sus publicaciones en Twitter/X en defensa de las mujeres y de los niños contra la ideología de género
El enjuiciamiento de la parlamentaria finlandesa Päivi Räsänen y del obispo Pohjola continúa en su cuarto año a pesar de la sentencia judicial unánime de «no culpabilidad».
Seguir leyendoInternational body demands response from Mexican government on congressman convicted as a “political offender” for censored Twitter/X posts
Mexican congressman and former presidential candidate Gabriel Quadri convicted as a “political violator against women” for Twitter/X posts on gender.
Seguir leyendoLeaked documents reveal deep-rooted medical scandal behind international guideline-setters on “gender-affirming healthcare”
Exchanges between doctors contradict public assurances that so-called “gender-affirming” care is “medically necessary” or that consent is informed
Seguir leyendoUS Senate moves to “leverage all diplomatic and sanctions tools available” to hold global violators accountable for religious freedom abuses
Members of the United States Senate introduced resolution recognizing importance of religious freedom and condemning violators.
Seguir leyendoGerman taxi driver fined over tiny rear window Bible quote sticker
A German city has issued a fine against taxi driver Jalil Mashali over alleged unlawful «religious advertising,” because of a small Bible verse sticker on his rear window reading «Jesus – I am the way. The truth. And the life».
Seguir leyendoWHO pandemic treaty negotiations resume while concerns mount about censorship threats: “cure cannot be worse than the disease”
WHO pandemic treaty draft threatens freedom of expression by requiring governments to manage “infodemics” defined as “too much information”.
Seguir leyendoUN Expert warns Biden Administration: Permitting males in womens’ sports can breach human rights, cause “extreme psychological distress” and risks “physical and sexual attacks”
UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls issues letter warning against proposed Title IX rule change, requiring schools to permit males to compete in female-only sports.
Seguir leyendoLent pro-life volunteers alarmed as Germany considers UK-style censorship zones to criminalise help and prayer near abortion organisations
- New draft law would introduce censorship zones in Germany for behaviour that could be perceived as “confusing” or “disturbing” – potentially including prayer
- Asked about the frequency of “harassment” incidents at abortion facilities that would justify the introduction of censorship zones, the government admitted: «The federal government does not have any concrete numerical findings.»
- German lawyer Dr. Felix Böllmann: “The German government wants to ban something, but doesn’t know what or why”
Berlin (15 February 2024) – During Lent, pro-life volunteers again set to the streets to pray for women and their unborn children. In Germany, however, a new bill plans to introduce vaguely defined censorship zones, banning behaviour that could be perceived as “confusing” or “disturbing” within 100 Meters of abortion organizations with fines up to 5,000€.
The bill has already caused confusion due to its vague wording and disputed necessity. In response to a parliamentary question seeking information on how, when, and where problematic incidents of hindrance or harassment near abortion facilities occurred, the responsible Ministry recently admitted: «The federal government does not have any concrete numerical findings» that would support the need for such a far-reaching bill.
“Thoughtcrimes” in the UK as a warning example
Whereas harassment is already illegal, free speech advocates warn that the language of the bill could criminalise a simple offer of help made to women in crisis pregnancies, as well as prayer. In the UK, where censorship zones have already been introduced, charitable volunteer Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was arrested for praying silently in her head near an abortion facility, as seen in a viral video. With support from ADF International, Vaughan-Spruce was acquitted in court; but two further individuals currently await trial for the same “thoughtcrime”. ADF International is supporting their legal defence.
“The right to peacefully pray is protected by international and national law. No matter one’s opinion on abortion, everyone suffers when we start to censor the right to speak freely, pray, or engage in consensual conversations. The federal government wants to ban something but doesn’t know what or why. This law doesn’t ban “confusion”, it creates more of it – both for citizens trying to understand the law and police officers who will have to enforce any vague new prohibitions,” noted Dr. Felix Böllmann, German lawyer and Director of European Advocacy for ADF International.
The draft bill is currently with the Federal Council and is still open for amendments. It will be voted on in the parliament.
A new video features ADF International spokesperson Ludwig Brühl explaining the detrimental effects of censorship zones: “The government wants to ban certain opinions in an area the size of almost five football pitches.
You are currently viewing a placeholder content from YouTube. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationFederal minister Lisa Paus, who is pushing for the bill, said: “if you harass people with expressions of opinion that they clearly don’t want to hear, then this will become an offence punishable with a fine of up to €5,000.” Brühl disagrees: “Of course harassment is rightly prohibited – and has been for a long time. But this is just an excuse to marginalize, punish and censor certain opinions. Pro-life volunteers are there to pray, or to offer information about help available to women who would like to consider other options than abortion.”
ADF International conducts global advocacy for free speech. In the UK and Germany, ADF International lawyers have successfully supported several pro-life volunteers who faced criminal proceedings for their silent prayers.
Images for free use in print or online in relation to this story only
