05/09/2026
Mwijuka Jesca the President of Workers in Informal Economy Network Uganda -WIENU joining the world to discuss matters of importance.
IMPACT OF "PHILANTHROPIST" FUNDING WHO DURING COVID- 19 PLUS DEMOCRATIZATION OF THE UN.
Read the full article below 👇
https://politeknik-international.org/impact-of-philanthropists-funding-who-during-covid-19-democratisation-of-the-un/
Topic Suggestion: Reframed for Workers in the Informal Economy in Uganda.
Working Title
"Who Pays, Who Decides?
Philanthropic Funding of WHO During COVID-19 and What It Meant for Kampala’s Market Vendors, Boda Riders & Informal Workers".
A contribution to the debate on the democratisation of the UN and global health governance
1. WHY THIS MATTERS TO INFORMAL WORKERS IN UGANDA.
During COVID-19, decisions made in Geneva by WHO directly landed on Uganda Markets,Boda Boda stages, and taxi parks.
Lockdowns, mask mandates, vaccine rollouts, "essential worker" definitions all traced back to WHO guidance.
But who was funding WHO to make those decisions? And did workers have a voice?
2. THE CORE ISSUE: MONEY = POWER.
WHO Funding Structure during COVID:
1. Member States like Uganda: Up to 16% of WHO budget. Pay small, fixed fees. Have 1 vote each.
2. Governments of rich countries: Almost 50%. Give big voluntary donations.
3. "Philanthropists" / Private foundations: almost 30-35%. Biggest is Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Also Wellcome, Mastercard Foundation, corporate donors.
The Problem: Most of this money is "earmarked". Meaning donors say "this money is ONLY for vaccines" or "ONLY for COVID testing". WHO can’t use it for what Uganda’s health workers or market vendors ask for.
3. IMPACTS SEEN IN UGANDA'S INFORMAL ECONOMY.
A. On Policy: Lockdowns & "Essential Work"
WHO guidance shaped Uganda’s lockdowns. Markets were partially closed because of social distance and walk to work, which failed many people. Boda riders were banned except those doing delivery or carrying sick people of which many were left out and etc...
Question for debate: Were these policies shaped by public health data alone, or also by funders pushing vaccine/testing solutions over social protection for workers?
B. On Vaccines: COVAX
COVAX was the main WHO program to get vaccines to Uganda. It was heavily funded by philanthropists.
Impact on workers:
- Delay: Uganda got vaccines late because rich countries bought directly first.
- Priority: Health workers + elderly first. Market vendors and boda riders were often "group 3 or 4". No seat at the table to argue they are "essential".
- Mandates: No jab, no work policies at markets hit informal workers hardest.
C. On Information & Trust.
WHO guidance changed fast: masks, no masks, then masks , this and that
Workers asked: "Who is WHO listening to?" When funding comes from a few big foundations, does that create perception of bias? That hurt trust in communities.
4. LINK TO "DEMOCRATISATION OF THE UN"
Right now the UN/WHO works like this:
- Democratic in theory: 194 countries, including Uganda, get 1 vote.
- Undemocratic in practice: The countries + foundations that pay the most voluntary money set the agenda.
For informal workers this means:
The people who lost income, were beaten by LDUs, Police and had no safety net during lockdowns had ZERO direct say in the global rules that caused it.
The Debate Questions:
1. Should WHO be funded mainly by member states through increased fees, so it’s accountable to governments and citizens, not donors?
2. Should worker organizations like WIENU have observer status in WHO meetings?
3. Did philanthropic money help Uganda get vaccines faster, or did it push a "medical only" response and ignore jobs, food, and income?
