top of page
W.H.O. Treaty Amendments

Linda Dion

April 14, 2024

Marcel and I have found that Dr. Leslyn Lewis, a lawyer and a federal MP for the Conservative Party, has an exceptional grasp of the issues involved with the new "Pandemic Treaty" that the W.H.O. is so keen to implement.  We've said it many times lately that a great "shift" occurred with the implementation of the lockdown in 2020; something was unleashed upon the world to begin robbing us of our rights and of our freedom.  Along with a veritable explosion of sexual perversion, there was also a clearer unveiling of the globalist agenda. This agenda is being promoted by human "agents" but originates in the evil one, who incessantly attempts to steal, kill and destroy (John 10:10) all of humanity.

We believe this Treaty is part of that Agenda, which has as its foundational principles a global governance system that would enslave all countries to itself.  

This Pandemic Treaty would give non-elected officials the power to direct the global health management of pandemics which would be legally binding to any signatory countries.  Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus, the Director-General of the W.H.O., has openly stated that "the importance of a legally binding instrument cannot be overstated: it will be our collective legacy for future generations."

Our Canadian government under Trudeau has stated its support for both partially and fully binding elements. Dr. Lewis is trying very hard to make people aware that such a decision would endanger our sovereignty in matters of health emergencies.  You will find below a copy of an email that she sent out about a month ago, explaining her concerns.*


* Please note that it is not our intention to promote or support any one political party over another; rather we wish to bring to your attention this very disturbing, and frankly dangerous scheme of the globalist agenda.


This is fundamentally a call to repentance, prayer and intercession for our country! 

World Health Organization Pandemic Treaty: The Core Issue

MAR 2, 2024


Dear Family, 

With nations converging at the World Health Organization (WHO) this May to vote on a legally binding treaty that will transform the global regime for responding to global health emergencies, there has never been a more vital time for Canadians to be aware of what is happening at the WHO. 

Under the stated objective of creating a “stronger and more accountable WHO” in the aftermath of COVID-19, the proposed new pandemic accord will make the WHO stronger to “promote political commitment at the highest level” when the world is faced with the next global pandemic. This treaty is designed to compel compliance with future WHO directives. 

This treaty will define a pandemic, which will then determine when the treaty’s rules kick into gear, which will trigger a global state of emergency, which will compel signatory nations, including Canada, to do likewise, putting into motion a domino of compliance measures that countries will be expected to keep. The treaty will be legally binding, meaning it will become a violation of international law should any nation choose to go against the WHO’s directives. While the WHO states that it will respect national sovereignty, the reality is that this treaty will legally compel action based on decisions that are made by unelected WHO technocrats when a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) is declared.  Many Canadians are concerned about what happens during an emergency, as they remember the suspension of Charter rights during the COVID-19 pandemic. The way that we deal with pandemics and PHEICs will change once the Pandemic Treaty is approved.  


Along with this treaty, more than 300 proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) will be voted on — many of which will provide the WHO with the legal teeth needed to exercise its power and control whenever the next pandemic hits. Canada has already signed onto IHR amendments which resulted in shortening the timeframe to reject any new amendments (from 18 to 10 months). Even this seemingly minor change means it will be more difficult for countries to independently react and respond to what’s being proposed at the global level within a shortened timeframe.  

When I started sounding the alarm on this treaty, I was either ignored or mocked. They called me a conspiracy theorist. The evidence and the facts are clear. This may well be a conspiracy, but it’s no theory. Read the changes for yourself and tell me what you think.  

Below is an example of just one of the many hundreds of amendments being proposed that will change the nature of the WHO’s powers. The yellow highlights below show how these amendments change the role of the WHO from an advisory body that provides guidance to member states like Canada, to a decision-making authority setting mandatory responses to which nations like Canada must adhere.  



Article I Definitions

For the purposes of the International Health Regulations (hereinafter"the IHR" or "Regulations"):


"health products" include therapeutics, vaccines, medical devices, personal protective equipment, diagnostics, assistive products, cell- and gene-based therapies, and their components, materials or parts."


"health products" include medicines, vaccines, medical devices, diagnostics, assistive products, cell- and gene-based therapies, and other health technologies, but not limited to this course.


"health technologies and know-how" includes organized set or combination of knowledge, skills, health products, procedures, databases and systems developed to solve a health problem and improve quality of life, including those relating to development or manufacture of health products or their combination, its application or usage. "Health technologies" are interchangeably used as"health care technologies"



"standing recommendation" means non binding advice issued by WHO for specific ongoing public health risks pursuant to Article 16 regarding appropriate health measures for routine or periodic application needed to prevent or reduce the international spread of disease and minimize interference with international traffic;


"temporary recommendation" means non binding advice issued by WHO pursuant to Article 15 for application on a time-limited, risk-specific basis, in response to a public health emergency of Source: World Health Organization - Proposed International Health Regulation Amendments.


As of May 14, the latest news is that the UK will not be signing the Treaty because of sovereignty issues.

On May 22, 24 U.S. governors sent a letter to president Biden indicating that they will oppose the Treaty.  This letter very effectively articulates the dangers of this Treaty:

Also, the Slovakian prime minister Fico, who opposed the Treaty for his country, was shot multiple times on Wednesday May 15, in an assassination attempt.  He was in critical condition, but is expected to survive.

Following is Dr. Lewis' latest update on the ongoing situation regarding the W.H.O. Pandemic Treaty. This Treaty is dangerous not only because it will cause countries to lose their sovereignty in matters of global health emergencies, but also because it will enable these unelected officials to use the umbrella of "global health emergencies" to also include matters pertaining to "health and reproduction" (read abortion, sexual orientation, etc.),  "climate change" and anything else that they deem as coming under their authority and control.  The legally binding Treaty will give these technocrats the legal means to compel compliance.  

Dear Family, 

From May 27th-June 1st, world leaders will gather for the World Health Organization’s (WHO) 77th World Health Assembly. During this gathering, it is expected that countries will vote on a new legally binding Pandemic Accord and amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHRs). This is the culmination of the issues I have been warning about for several years now.   

Repeatedly, I have raised a variety of concerns including the authority these changes give to the WHO to erode our national health sovereignty in times of emergency.  

This week, I sent another letter to the Minister of Health to express my concern about Canada signing on to these amendments because the WHO has not yet released the final version of many of these amendments. This goes directly against Article 55 of the IHR (2005), which stipulates that the WHO Director-General must communicate any proposed amendment to all States Parties at least four months before the World Health Assembly for consideration.


As we await what is ahead in the weeks to come, I want to re-assert that it is undemocratic for Canada to join in this agreement without Canadians having full disclosure and understanding of what is being agreed to. 

I also recommend that if you share in these concerns, you consider using your voice and influence to reach out to your Member of Parliament and Senators, who represent you in our Parliament.  You can find contact information for Members of Parliament  here and for Senators here . 

In you service, 

Leslyn Lewis Member of Parliament Haldimand-Norfolk

bottom of page