Critics warn that the UN’s ‘Pact for the Future’ could impose digital IDs, vaccine passports, and censorship, while giving the Secretary-General unprecedented authority during global crises.
As the 79th United Nations (UN) General Assembly approaches, concerns are rising over the proposed Pact for the Future, which critics argue could lead to the establishment of global digital IDs, vaccine passports, and expanded online censorship. World leaders will meet later this month in New York to discuss the initiative, which some believe could also grant the UN Secretary-General unprecedented emergency powers.
The Pact for the Future is part of the UN’s ongoing Our Common Agenda and includes a wide array of policy proposals aimed at addressing global challenges in the 21st century. Among the key items up for discussion are the creation of a Global Digital Compact, an Emergency Platform, and a declaration to protect future generations.
Critics like Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst have raised concerns about the concentration of executive power in the hands of the UN Secretary-General. “The lack of checks and balances is very worrying,” Terhorst said. She noted that the proposals could undermine national sovereignty, as they grant the Secretary-General “standing authority” to declare emergencies, potentially without the consent of member states.
Other critics, like Francis Boyle, a professor of international law at the University of Illinois, have expressed fears that the Emergency Platform would allow the Secretary-General to bypass the UN Charter and exert undue authority over global affairs. “What the secretary-general is trying to do is an end run around the UN Charter,” Boyle said.
The Global Digital Compact, another key proposal, seeks to advance a digital future that promotes universal human rights. However, it also introduces controversial elements such as digital IDs, vaccine passports, and increased regulation of online content under the guise of combating “disinformation.”
“With digital ID, it is easier for governments to censor and threaten voices with a different opinion,” Terhorst warned, referencing the compact’s focus on addressing “information integrity” on digital platforms. The brief suggests creating a consensus on facts and science, but critics argue this could lead to selective suppression of dissenting opinions.
According to James Roguski, an independent journalist, the UN has not been fully transparent in the lead-up to the Summit of the Future. “The status of the three documents has not been honestly presented to the general public,” Roguski said, referring to the fourth revision of the Global Digital Compact, which was drafted in late August but has yet to be fully disclosed on the UN’s website.
The Our Common Agenda initiative is also closely tied to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with some critics linking it to the broader agendas of international organizations like the World Economic Forum. Tim Hinchliffe, publisher of The Sociable, suggested that the Summit and the Pact for the Future are part of an effort to “reshape our world,” in line with the WEF’s vision for a “Great Reset”.
As the UN General Assembly draws nearer, opposition to the proposals continues to grow. Critics are warning that the Pact for the Future could erode personal freedoms, usher in global censorship, and centralize power in ways that might not align with the values of member states or their citizens.
For more information on the proposed Pact for the Future, visit the official documents here and here.
