The World Health Organization’s (WHO) planned high-cost conference on tobacco control in November year is expected to exacerbate its financial strains, following the United States’ withdrawal, according to harm reduction advocates.
The 11th Conference of the Parties (COP11) to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), scheduled for Nov. 17 to 22, 2025, at the Geneva International Conference Centre in Switzerland, will cost the WHO millions of dollars.
The US earlier withdrew its membership, citing the WHO’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, which originated in Wuhan, China, and other global health crises, its failure to adopt reforms and its alleged perceived lack of independence from political influence.
Harm reduction advocates, including the Coalition of Asia Pacific Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates (CAPHRA), called on the WHO to reconsider holding the costly COP11, citing funding constraints and concerns about the organization’s priorities.
They said the WHO should instead redirect its resources from the Geneva meeting to address more pressing global health crises rather than attacking tobacco harm reduction.
Other donors are also reducing contributions, increasing the influence of private donors, such as Bloomberg Philanthropies, on the WHO and countries that adopt its health policies.
Critics labeled the FCTC’s stance on tobacco harm reduction as overly dismissive, ignoring scientific evidence supporting less harmful nicotine alternatives. They also alleged a lack of transparency on the part of the WHO FCTC which did not allow participation from civil society.
These concerns are raising questions about the FCTC’s ability to lead global tobacco and nicotine control. Harm reduction advocates urged FCTC parties to guard against “anti-scientific approaches”.
In 2021, a committee at the House of Representatives in the Philippines found the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) received grants from Bloomberg Philanthropies for policy development.
The WHO FCTC faces similar criticism regarding political influence by special interest groups, with allegations of interference in the domestic policies of the Philippines, India, Pakistan and Vietnam.
The US withdrawal also prompted countries including Italy, Argentina and Hungary to reconsider their affiliations with the WHO, citing concerns about impartiality and political influence.
Following the US departure, the WHO has become more reliant on private funding, particularly from Bloomberg Philanthropies, drawing criticism from countries like the Philippines for alleged interference in local policies.
Former Rep. Jericho Nograles said in a 2021 hearing that foreign private organizations had tried to influence national policies through grants to government agencies, calling it “an attack” on the country’s sovereignty.
“The bigger issue here is do we allow government agencies to be influenced by monies coming from foreign private organizations?” Nograles said in the 2021 public hearing.
“What we are looking at here is a constitutional violation, an attack on the sovereignty of the Republic of the Philippines, our independence itself. That is the big problem,” said Nograles.
Consumer groups and harm reduction advocates said developing nations like the Philippines face more urgent public health issues, but the WHO is directing funds toward costly policy summits that ignore local needs and scientific evidence.
They also criticized the WHO and the WHO FCTC for excluding key stakeholders from meetings and allegedly ignoring scientific evidence to appease funders.