Are the Pandemic Treaty negotiators being silently cut out of negotiations on pathogen access and benefits?
Does a parallel process through the UN seek to claim jurisdiction over the issue instead? Need legal minds with spare time.
I made a discovery recently that may be very relevant to explaining the waffling at the pandemic treaty negotiations. I was looking into other UN processes that are being used for the globalist agenda, and stumbled upon this.
I discovered a parallel process related to “Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing” (an area of great disagreement in the Pandemic Treaty) going on in preparation for the UN Conference of the Parties 16 of the Convention on Biological Diversity, scheduled to meet Oct 21-Nov 1, 2024 in Cali, Colombia.
The UN’s Biological Diversity COP 16 parties are negotiating changes to the 2014 Nagoya protocol, which first established an “access and benefit sharing system” for providing international access to Genetic Resources of individual countries, in exchange for benefits. This Nagoya protocol is the basis from which the WHO’s proposed biowarfare agent library (“pathogen access and benefit-sharing system”), which is a critical part of the Pandemic Treaty, was developed.
Yet this UN process has not been mentioned in the documents I have seen regarding the WHO pandemic treaty. Surely this is no error. The issue of pathogen access and benefit sharing is being negotiated for the WHO pandemic treaty and ALSO for the UN Biodiversity conference at the same time it seems, by different negotiators on different continents. Surely this is no accident?
The document I am concerned about is #4 on this page, and I have excerpted from it below:
See pages 37-40 of this document, pictured below. Document #4 from the page above:
I am concerned about whether some [highlighted] language in this document is intended to place decisions about pathogen access and benefit sharing into the hands of the Nagoya protocol negotiators, superceding WHO pandemic treaty negotiations and cutting out the troublesome negotiators there. What do you think?
I’d love to hear from the lawyers
