Public Notice: Sue the WHO | Terminate Tedros
Addendum on May 21.22
IHR amendments adopted 2022 were decided in back rooms with no formal vote. What are they up to this time? Will the vax passport/digital ID become a WHO directive?
The great reset of the Rule of Law
HUGE ANNOUNCEMENT AND ACTION TO SIGN COMING SOON!
Tedros simply will NOT answer actual charges in the WHO “oversight ethics system”, despite having had the repeated right of reply within 8 days.
Clearly Tedros is in default, thus agreeing to everything in our documents as far as the law and IOJ is concerned.
The WHO rules give us the right to present an 8 day notice of claim and the wrongdoers have the right of reply.
Tedros is in hiding as we mentioned 3 days ago:
Tomorrow we are presenting an 8 day notice of claim to WHA and we will want you all to sign it. The ‘Final Notice Of Claim To Terminate Tedros’ will be explaining why WHA has no choice but to TERMINATE TEDROS on the spot with no benefits and waive his immunity for upcoming prosecutions.
Get ready to help IOJ explain why WHA has no choice but to terminate Tedros for "reasons of exceptional gravity likely to prejudice the interests of the organization."
Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights
Thanks Doug and James.
Date and place of adoption:19 October 2005 - Paris, France.
Theme: Natural Sciences
Type of instrument: Declarations
1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.
2. Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent. Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice. Exceptions to this principle should be made only in accordance with ethical and legal standards adopted by States, consistent with the principles and provisions set out in this Declaration, in particular in Article 27, and international human rights law.
3. In appropriate cases of research carried out on a group of persons or a community, additional agreement of the legal representatives of the group or community concerned may be sought. In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual’s informed consent.
Thanks for reading Our Greater Destiny Blog! Subscribe for free to receive meaningful posts and support unbridled attempts to right the wrongs. TY!
Without prejudice and without recourse
Doreen A Agostino
Archive - Our Greater Destiny Blog