Introduction:
The People’s Republic of China seems to be the clear felon for the unprecedented case of trans-boundary harm: the global pandemic COVID-19. The SARS-CoV-2 was originally detected in Wuhan, a city in the Hubei province of China in late December 2019. People across the globe have been demanding that the country where the pandemic emerged should be held legally and financially accountable.
Origination of the virus:
A substantial number of experts are of the view that a wet market in Wuhan, China called the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market is the source of COVID-19. This market had a wild animal section where live and slaughtered species were for sale: snakes, porcupines, baby crocodiles etc. This market use to sell even the illegal species. However, on January 1, 2020, the Chinese government temporarily closed the market, after it was identified as the likely source and on January 26, China banned the trade and consumption of wild animals, however it remains unclear whether this ban is fully enforced, because much of the trade-in wildlife is now conducted online, and it goes unchecked. But, given the lock-down restrictions have begun to ease, despite the dangerous and unsanitary practices that have been practiced in these markets, China has decided to re-open those markets, without wild animals, for sale.
On December 30, Chinese doctor Li Wenliang warned about the outbreak of illness resembling severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which sparked a pandemic similar as in 2003. This early warning could have prevented the spread, but Chinese authorities didn’t acted on it and instead summoned him to the Public Security Bureau in Wuhan on accusations that he had made false statements and disrupted the public order. The Chinese government continued with numerous other arrests and publicly warned that it would punish anyone spreading “rumors” on social media.
Cover-up and Blackout of Data by China:
The irresponsible behavior by the Chinese government broadened by censoring and suppressing alongside imprisoning Chinese medical professionals who were reporting on the virus. China also spread out misinformation that there was no human-to-human transmission. All the stories and the posts have been wiped out the Chinese internet and the accounts of the users posting those have been blocked since the outbreak began. This indicates that Beijing didn’t want its own people to be heard.
Two kinds of content were targeted for deletion by censors: Journalistic investigations of how the epidemic first started in late 2019 and live transmission of the mayhem and suffering inside Wuhan in the early days of city’s lock-down, as its medical system buckled. Each and every type of articles and news stories portraying the horrendous situation were abruptly deleted after being posted. Many people were detained by the Wuhan Public Security Bureau for allegedly spreading rumors. Even, the doctors were not allowed to wear isolation gowns because that might intensify fears.
Many also accuse that China intentionally concealed of the severity to stock up on medical supplies and didn’t inform World Health Organisation for much of January so that it could increase its imports of face masks and surgical gowns and gloves from abroad sharply.
WHO in tandem with China as an abettor/ accomplice:
China’s failure to act on an early outbreak multiplied the danger manifold by its refusal to confirm human-to-human transmission until as late as January 20 (approx. 55 days after the infection was first noticed). This censoring of crucial information by China, amplified by WHO’s callowness, helped the disease become a pandemic. It seems WHO’s consistent ignorance of credible reports of virus spreading in Wuhan from early December 2019, led to failure of adequately receiving and sharing information in a timely and transparent manner with member countries.
The WHO as on January 4, 2020 said that China has reported to it ‘a cluster of pneumonia cases, with no deaths’, on December 31, 2019. On January 5, 2020, the WHO put out an official statement saying it has asked China for more information about the illness. Even on January 14, the WHO tweeted ‘Preliminary Investigations conducted by Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission’. But on the same day, Maria Kerkhove, head of WHO’s emerging diseases unit, contradicted this and hinted that there was ‘limited human-to-human transmission’ observed in Wuhan.
On January 20 and 21, a regional WHO team visited Wuhan followed by a visit of Dr. Tedros Adhanom, Director-General of WHO, to Beijing on January 28. Till January 23, 2020, when Wuhan was put under lockdown, Dr. Tedros was arguing against declaring it an emergency relying on Chinese health data and off late, WHO decided not to declare it an international health emergency.
John Mackenzie, a committee member termed this delay as ‘very poor reporting and communication from China’ and attributed this decision, for delay in the ‘mobilization of public-health resources’ around the world. Lately, on January 30, 2020, WHO declared Covid-19, a public health emergency of global concern. Despite all these callousness of WHO and the rapid spread of virus globally, Dr. Tedros, on February 26, observed that ‘Using the word pandemic carelessly has no tangible benefit’, which depicts WHO’s antipathetic functioning.
During all February, all that WHO did was to publish ‘operational planning guidance’ for countries and warning that the window of opportunity for preventing the virus’s spread might soon close. By the start of March, going by WHO’s report, it urged for ‘multi-sector scenario planning and simulations’, but didn’t pushed directly for stringent measures”, such as suspending large-scale gatherings and closing schools and workplaces”, to contain the virus. However, on March 11, 2020, a ‘Pandemic’ was declared by the WHO, and by this time 114 countries had already reported cases.
China’s Supremacy over World Health Organisation:
Countries globally allege that WHO had gone too close to China. Not only the previous WHO director-general, Margaret Chan, was a Chinese national but her successor, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the former Ethiopian health minister, is also China’s candidate to run the WHO in 2017. Taiwan says it had warned WHO of the trouble in Wuhan in late December, and also about the possibility of human-to-human transmission, but WHO didn’t respond to it and pass it on to others, instead choosing to stay on to China’s official statements and its reassurances.
The main reason behind this is said to be that Taiwan is not a WHO member, because of objections from China, which claims the island one of its provinces and deems it shall not have right to membership of international bodies. This lends “back-hand” support to China by WHO for its ‘One China Policy’ in which Taiwan would have to accept that it is part of China. The WHO has duly obliged its “faithfulness” towards China as it also receives a significant portion of its funding from the country.
Conclusion:
The Strategic negligence of China and WHO had made the pandemic possible. It has brought the world economy to the verge of collapse and is filling hospitals and cemeteries all over the globe. China also clearly seems to have censored its citizens ‘right to freedom of speech ‘and even its own National Anthem fell under the censor’s radar because it begins with the words ‘Rise up, people who do not want to be Slaves’.
Countries and Governments around the world, rely on WHO as the most authoritative source of information on the infectious disease which has “lack of independence” functioning owing to China. China’s failure and WHO’s reluctance to challenge has ravaged the healthcare system in countries and has “cost many lives”. This also reflects that WHO failed at its core mission of sharing transparent information when member states do not act in ‘good faith’. WHO must have a restructuring, and become far more transparent and accountable.
About author –
This article is authored by Govind Hari Lath, a Final Year Student at the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. Govind has a keen Interest in General Corporate Laws, Mergers & Acquisitions, Insolvency & Dispute Resolution Laws and has a zeal to write on contemporary issues and its legal aspects. For any discussions related to the article, he can be contacted at linkedin.com/in/govind-lath-
Also Read: Galwan Valley: Understanding the Law of Engagement at the LAC
