It is interesting that the Constitution of the World Health Organization (WHO) does not contain a specific clause or article that prohibits or permits withdrawal. The absence of a withdrawal clause is somehow understable as health is such a critical issue that affects humanity, and does not recognise borders. This intentional move emphasizes the principle of universality and ensures long-term global health security. However what would happen if there will be continuous withdrawal of members or the resources to the organisation keeps dwindling?
Yes, that’s the reason why there’s no exit clause in the Constitution! I’m personally not too worried about further withdrawals as historically several states who expressed wanting to leave didn’t end up going through with it. As for resources… other member states will hopefully step up any pay more! Let’s see!
It is interesting that the Constitution of the World Health Organization (WHO) does not contain a specific clause or article that prohibits or permits withdrawal. The absence of a withdrawal clause is somehow understable as health is such a critical issue that affects humanity, and does not recognise borders. This intentional move emphasizes the principle of universality and ensures long-term global health security. However what would happen if there will be continuous withdrawal of members or the resources to the organisation keeps dwindling?
Yes, that’s the reason why there’s no exit clause in the Constitution! I’m personally not too worried about further withdrawals as historically several states who expressed wanting to leave didn’t end up going through with it. As for resources… other member states will hopefully step up any pay more! Let’s see!