WHO and why?

What possessed Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organisation, to appoint Robert Mugabe as a goodwill ambassador? It can hardly have escaped the notice of the Ethiopian head of WHO that the Zimbabwean president was a controversial choice. In fact it is hard to think of a more unsuitable candidate for the role.

Not only is Mr Mugabe, 93, responsible for human rights abuses on an epic scale, but he has presided over the collapse of public health in the country that has been unfortunate enough to been led by him for almost 40 years. So poor is the care in Zimbabwe that Mr Mugabe himself routinely travels abroad for treatment.

It should have been apparent to anyone at the WHO that this was an unsustainable appointment and, indeed, it was duly withdrawn yesterday after a totally predictable international outcry.

In a statement, Mr Tedros said he had consulted with the Zimbabwean government and decided that rescinding Mr Mugabe’s position was “in the best interests” of the WHO. It is surprising to learn that it was necessary to seek the views of the Zimbabwean government and it points to an unhealthily cosy relationship. Mr Tedros – who defeated a British candidate earlier this year to become the first African to head the organisation – was a controversial choice, not least because he was a minister in Ethiopia’s hard-line authoritarian government.

Countries such as the UK and especially America, who provide the lion’s share of the organisation’s funding, are entitled to expect it to be well-run and beyond reproach. This episode suggests closer scrutiny is needed.