Greetings WHO INB and Member States,

Dear World Health Organization, Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, Esteemed Members and Friends,

I support the following dispute of non inclusion of all stakeholders and ask you to immediately attend the simple request for assistance from relevant stakeholders Interest of Justice. Furthermore, it is very regretful that the WHO INB and Member States are creating the appearance of cherrypicking invited stakeholders, as this creates a false consensus.

It is my wish to stop the Pandemic Treaty negotiations due to inherent structural legal, ethical and scientific defects in the draft of the instrument which are so voluminous it needs a hearing and full correction, otherwise the Pandemic Agreement will never conform to the international norms for derogations of human rights in an emergency or for upholding mechanisms to ensure human rights as required by Siracusa Principles and ICCPR, which many Member States have ratified as the \"Supreme Guidance\" in a declared emergency to which all measures must conform.

In accordance with the latest Revised draft of the negotiating text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, 13 March 2024 document A/INB/9/3, we would like to present the risk in which we believe need to be addressed in a formal hearing. We request a science integrity dispute hearing to discuss the draft of the Pandemic Agreement which has science integrity, ethics and legal omissions which must be addressed.

Please attend our disputes concerning the Pandemic Agreements risk, concerns and possible mitigations by providing a private or a publc hearing with Interest of Justice and their Global Scientific Integrity Task Force, who\'s only goal is to assist in the process.

We all need more information and due process prior to any agreements being made.

Interest of Justice was recognized by WHO INB in April 2022 as being interested and relevant stakeholders in pandemic preparedness and response, therefore since ALL stakeholders are invited during the 10th meeting of the INB July 16-17 2024, we kindly request for Interest of Justice to be included on (Annexes A–E) and kindly request Interest of Justice to be invited to observe in the closed sessions of the INB, including meetings of the drafting group through any available modality.

The following was sent to ethics and the INB directly on Thursday July 12, 2024 from Interest of Justice and we urge the WHO INB to immediately respond and include our organization in the TENTH MEETING OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATING BODY TO DRAFT AND NEGOTIATE A WHO CONVENTION, AGREEMENT OR OTHER INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENT ON PANDEMIC PREVENTION, PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE.

In the 11 July 2024 document A/INB/10/3,  titled: TENTH MEETING OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL NEGOTIATING BODY TO DRAFT AND NEGOTIATE A WHO CONVENTION, AGREEMENT OR OTHER INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENT ON PANDEMIC PREVENTION, PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE A/INB/10/3 Provisional agenda item 3. Proposed workplan, meeting schedule and updates, as appropriate, to the method of work:

10. In accordance with document A/INB/1/3 Rev.1, relevant stakeholders1 will continue to attend open sessions of the INB and provide inputs as requested. To facilitate predictable and meaningful engagement, the Bureau will circulate iterations of the texts under negotiation, without Member State attributions, to all relevant stakeholders after each meeting. In line with past practice, relevant stakeholders will also be invited to provide written inputs relating to the articles under negotiation at that session, to be posted on the INB site for the reference of the INB drafting group.

The Bureau will continue to hold regular briefings with relevant stakeholders to provide updates on the status of work of the INB. In advance of the proposed eleventh and twelfth meetings, the Bureau will also organize a one-day sessions on key topics to provide additional opportunity for relevant stakeholders to discuss with Member States and provide their inputs. 11. It is proposed that relevant stakeholders (Annexes A–E) be invited to observe closed sessions of the INB, including meetings of the drafting group, unless otherwise decided by the INB. The observance of relevant stakeholders will enable them to provide informed views/inputs to better support the process.

Considering the INB meets again with all \"relevant and interested stakeholders\" the next few days of July 16-17, of 2024, while the rotation of the Bureau and the consideration of the proposed workplan are being negotiated, please include our organization as interested and relevant stakeholders and provide a modality to be included.

According to the document A/INB/8/5 there are two ways for \"relevant and interested stakeholders\" to be chosen:

1. “Relevant and Interested Stakeholders” are chosen by INB (which we were told at first that INB chose Interest of Justice as “relevant and interested stakeholders\") and we attended hearings but INB never responded to many letters asking to be on Annex E.

2. We have a dispute with INB that requires a written response immediately to be heard, because INB needs to explain why they first chose us as “relevant and interested stakeholders”, and that the definition is \"has important information to share\", but then INB omitted contact, participation and collaboration with our organization.

3. Is the WHO INB saying we are NOT “relevant and interested stakeholders”, because INB made a decision they changed their mind and cut us out of the process by refraining to answer us about how to get on Annex E to participate?

4. We requested to be on Annex E over and over with no response, but, according to the document A/INB/8/5, it was INB who cherrypicked the list for Annex E, not Member States! We feel marginalized, excluded and unable to share our relevant information, entitling us to \"extra assistance\" from WHO to participate, because we are marginalized and vulnerable. The WHO\'s own documents state that we are entitled to this extra assistance from WHO to ensure our ability to participate:

Please see footnote from the document: A/INB/8/5 2. 1 The approach set forth in this document is without prejudice to the engagement by Member States with relevant stakeholders, and at the regional level through the regional committees. Coherence of the approach set forth in this document with United Nations processes will be pursued wherever possible.

5. The ethics department has responded that it is member states alone who choose the relevant stakeholders, but in reality the INB alone has the duty to continue to include the original chosen interested and relevant stakeholders such as our organization Interest of Justice.

6. It is very clear that the WHO has omitted to respond to copious amounts of letters prior to this single response on this matter. It is regretful that the entire process has not benefitted from our input. Also, we feel injured by the non responses because it is very easy to write us back.

7. We were excluded from the following modalities, and are asking to include us in some form of consultation to stakeholders available in the following modalities. Please inform us if the INB will make prompt accommodations to facilitate our participation and to honor their promise written in black and white text that \"all interested and relevant stakeholders\" can attend the meeting on July 16th and 17th of 2024 regarding negotiations for the pandemic accord. Our organization will happily accept any of the following modalities for our inclusion:

3 Previous intergovernmental working groups have engaged with one or more categories of stakeholders using various modalities, including: (1) inviting stakeholders to observe working group meetings; (2) setting aside time within one or more working group meeting(s) for stakeholders to intervene; (3) holding separate meetings or “hearings”, where stakeholders are invited to provide inputs (in some instances, such meetings were followed by closed sessions of the working group to discuss the inputs provided); and (4) extending the opportunity to participate in electronic consultations to stakeholders.

To conclude, Interest of Justice is requesting their spot to attend in any modality, July 17-17 2024, in the 10th meeting of the INB to negotiate the pandemic accord and we are informing you that the INB has specifically chosen us as an interested and relevant stakeholder, therefore we are entitled to your extra assistance as marginalized and vulnerable primary stakeholders who are being excluded.

If the INB does not want to truly assist all stakeholders to have the ability to attend, and has revoked our status as \"Interested and Relevant Stakeholders\", meaning having \"important and relevant information to share\", please inform us of the reasons why we are not able to be included directly through the INB who originally chose us, and why the INB is now directing us to an \"auxiliary\" process which says that:

\"The approach set forth in this document [INB chooses directly] is without prejudice to the engagement by Member States with relevant stakeholders, and at the regional level through the regional committees.\"

If we are no longer \"interested and relevant\" stakeholders we request to be informed in writing immediately and the reasons why.

With kind regards and sincere appreciation

Interest of Justice

Dustin Bryce

contact@interestofjustice.org

Thank you for including all interested and relevant stakeholders, even those with dissenting views, in order to have the most robust and inclusive process possible.

%%your signature%%