Society
The WHO’s Disturbing Plans
Part 1, “Global Tyranny Is To Be Continued”
Since the beginning of the Corona pandemic, the lawyer Beate Bahner has been bracing herself against the pillars of the narrative and defending our fundamental rights. In an interview with Thomas A. Hein, she talks about the sluggish process of reappraising [past] laws and envisioning [new] laws that would allow dictatorship-like conditions in a similar situation.
raum&zeit interview with Beate Bahner, Heidelberg, by Thomas A. Hein, Bingen
Thomas A. Hein: Dear Ms. Bahner, three years have now passed since our first interview. At that time, we were still in the middle of the Corona pandemic proclaimed by the media. In the meantime, much of what was still called a conspiracy theory three years ago has come true. Above all, the publication of the RKI** protocols has opened the eyes of many people – even if they are still not covered in the mass media. Ms. Bahner, you defend many people who have been prosecuted for the countless – and, as we now know, nonsensical – measures of the Corona period. Has anything changed in court due to the many publications in recent years? What is your experience in practice?
Beate Bahner: Unfortunately, most courts continue to adhere to the narrative of the Corona pandemic and the associated legality and necessity of the Corona measures. As recently as November 2024, the appeal against a conviction for a mask certificate was dismissed, and the client was actually convicted of using an allegedly incorrect mask certificate. Of course, I have argued extensively with the RKI files, unfortunately without success in this case as well. This is a very sobering and frustrating reality. At the moment, the RKI files have actually moved very few courts to change their opinion, which I consider very questionable under the rule of law.
Critical Judges Live Dangerously
Hein: Have you ever met judges or prosecutors who have completely changed their minds about Corona and the measures today?
Bahner: I have actually experienced a judge who, with the consent of the public prosecutor’s office, lifted the – already very lenient – penalty order against a soldier for a forged vaccination certificate and caused the criminal proceedings to be discontinued. The dismissal even took place without a fine, which is almost sensational. This is because the forged vaccination certificate is punished quite harshly – depending on the [German] federal state – for example in Baden-Württemberg often with more than 90 daily sentences, so you have a criminal record.
The judge explained to me that I could be glad that he only had to decide the matter now. Two years earlier, he would have imposed radical sanctions and certainly not lifted the penalty order. He had “tyrannized” his environment in court with mandatory masks, opening of windows in the courtroom, distance regulations, etc. He also got vaccinated immediately because he had a pre-existing condition. He then explained: “Today I see it differently”.
The honesty and courage of this judge touched me deeply: For the first time, I experienced a judge who admitted through the flower* that he had been taken in by the Corona hoax, but had however recognized it in the meantime and who is now actually taking the appropriate legal measures.
So far, I have not mentioned the court or the name of the judge in order to protect this judge
Only when the extent of the corona fraud has reached the media can this judge also dare to publicly defend the decision. So far, however, we must continue to assume that judges and civil servants who oppose the Corona narrative on the basis of their own experiences and scientific findings will be prosecuted as criminals. The conviction of Judge Dettmar is a very inglorious example and will certainly go down negatively in legal history.
At the moment, the RKI files have actually persuaded very few courts to change their opinion.
World Power Instead of World Health
Hein: As it says itself, the World Health Organization (WHO) now wants to conclude a so-called pandemic agreement, a pandemic treaty, with its member countries as a lesson from the Corona period,. You have dealt intensively with the treaty and published a new book on this topic a few months ago: “Der WHO Pandemievertrag – der finale Angriff auf Ihre Freiheit” [“The WHO pandemic treaty – the final attack on your freedom”]. Before we look at this treaty and other projects you describe, let’s take a closer look at the WHO itself. Most people understand the WHO as a global association of countries that takes care of our health. Let’s take a closer look. Who or what really is the WHO?
Bahner: The WHO is a sub-organization of the United Nations (UN), but it is actually the largest “subsidiary” of the UN. It was founded in 1948 with the very strong goal of promoting and protecting the health of people worldwide. In fact, it must now be assumed that even 75 years ago, the founding of the WHO only served the long-term goal of achieving so-called global governance (world government) through health, health shocks and pandemics. Corona has masterfully shown that this can actually work.
The WHO consists of the so-called World Health Assembly and the so-called “Secretariat”, which is represented by the Director of the WHO (currently Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus). The main decisions – with the exception of the declaration of a pandemic – are made by the World Health Assembly, which meets annually in Geneva. In fact, however, the development of the Pandemic Treaty and the amendments to the International Health Regulations has shown that this body also disregards its own laws and regulations in an almost outrageous way. On 1 June 2024, for example, amendments were adopted in Geneva even though the four-month deadline for submission was not met – this is outrageous!
Hein: Can you also tell us something about who determines the WHO’s policy and who mainly finances it? In alternative media, the influence of private donors, such as Bill Gates and organizations of the pharmaceutical industry, are often pointed out. How great is their influence
Bahner: For decades, the WHO was originally financed almost exclusively by the membership fees of its member countries (currently 194 member states). When the United States first withdrew from the WHO in the 1990s, the influence of private companies and foundations began. In fact, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, as a so-called private actor, is the largest private donor to the WHO. In addition, however, there are other pharmaceutical-related foundations such as the Rockefeller Foundation and the Wellcome Trust.
The influence has increased massively since the introduction of a WHO regulation in 2016. This is the so-called FENSA (Framework of Engagement with Non-State-Actors) regulations.
After that, the conditions under which private institutions can cooperate with the WHO will be regulated – certainly under massive lobbying influence. This set of rules has opened the door to private influence on the WHO. We have also been familiar with these so-called “public-private partnerships” (PPP) in Germany for many years. In fact, private companies, corporations and foundations are thus taking over the upper hand for state tasks and, in case of doubt, still cashing in heavily from the member states.
So-called “emergency measures” can be prescribed, which have led to a complete standstill of society and the destruction of the economy for months.
International Emergency Law Threatens Fundamental Rights
Hein: You see your current book as an urgent warning cry and write that in addition to a pandemic agreement, there should also be a significant tightening of international health rules. The linchpin of this, as you write in the book, is the Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). What can we envision from that?
Bahner: The concept of pandemic is already included in the previous WHO regulations and is to be further expanded. The declaration of such an “international health emergency” is the push of a button for the triggering of a so-called “medical emergency law”. It could also be called medical martial law, which is put into effect in the event of an alleged international health emergency. In this case, one’s own national law on all health issues (in the case of Corona, however, also related to religious, economic, social and educational issues) is de facto suspended. So-called “emergency measures” can be prescribed and imposed and sanctioned, as we have already seen in the Corona period in §28 of the Infection Protection Act (IfSG). It is about the entire lockdown, mask, distance and vaccination measures, which ultimately led to a complete standstill of society and the destruction of the economy at times for months.
Pandemic With Mouse Cough
Hein: As already mentioned, in your book you also warn against a tightening of the international health regulations, the International Health Regulations (IHR), which have been in force since 2005. Can you briefly explain what these health rules mean and where they are valid? Are the member states of the WHO obliged to implement these rules into national law?
Bahner: The IHR 2005 were the basis for the worldwide corona measures and lockdown regulations. In Germany, the Infection Protection Act had been used in this respect, but this was massively amended in March 2020 and the period that followed. However, the obligatory basis was the International Health Regulations of 2005, which, however, are almost unknown in Germany! Neither my medical law colleagues nor the judges (for example at the Administrative Court of Baden-Württemberg) even knew that the IGV 2005 existed at all and what these regulations regulate.
While the previous IHR 2005 only contained so-called “recommendations”, these are now to be binding for all states if and to the extent that the Director General declares a health emergency. The concept of pandemic is to be vaguely expanded and thus be able to trigger a pandemic with every mouse cough. The measures are also to apply before and after the end of a pandemic.
States are to be obliged to stock a large number of pandemic products every year, presumably at overpriced prices specified by the WHO. There are no control options for the Director-General and no sanction possibilities, as the WHO and its staff enjoy so-called immunity.
All these are just a few examples of the fact that the global tyranny with Corona triggered by pandemics was not a one-off, but rather is to be continued permanently.
- Please follow this link to see Part 2 of this exclusive interview.
- Please follow this link to see Carolyn’s Comments regarding this interview.
Translator Notes:
* “Admitted through the flower” is an idiom [in the German language] that means to say something indirectly or veiledly. It’s like conveying a message using flowers (flower language) without using the words directly. This phrase is often used to express criticism or unwanted news in a more friendly and careful manner.
** RKI = Robert Koch Institute in Germany
An Exclusive Translated Article for P2P Supporters
From the Monthly Publications of P2P
Published June 2025
From an article in raum&zeit, Volume 43, Issue #254, March/April 2025
Translation & redaction by: Carolyn L. Winsor, P2P Consulting
© Copyright 2025, raum&zeit, Thomas Hein / Beate Bahner, Germany
AI Digital and online translation assistance utilized.
Beate Bahner: „WHO-Pandemie‑vertrag: Der finale Angriff auf Ihre Freiheit: Was Sie jetzt unbedingt wissen sollten!”,
Kopp Verlag,
2024, 22,99 €,
ISBN 978-3864459986
Ms. Bahner has written at least 3 excellent books on this and related topics, however all in German. Available on Amazon.
