Irregular migrants and the human right to health care: a case-study of health-care provision for irregular migrants in France and the UK

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvie da Lomba

AbstractInternational human rights law attaches the right of health care to the person. States, however, predicate this right on membership in the national community and access to publicly subsidised health care is normally contingent on national membership. With this in mind, this article considers the significance of a human rights approach to access to health care and undertakes a comparative study of health-care provision for irregular migrants in France and the UK. Irregular migrants are ineligible for national membership because they have breached immigration laws. Consequently their right to health care may only arise from international human rights law. This comparative study, however, shows that states resist the idea of a right to health care for people they regard as a threat to national sovereignty. Yet the author posits that the exercise of the government's immigration power may be reconciled with the realisation of irregular migrants' human right to health care.

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 268-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavlos Eleftheriadis

Do we have a legal and moral right to health care against others? There are international conventions and institutions that say emphatically yes, and they summarize this in the expression of “the right to health,” which is an established part of the international human rights canon. The International Covenant on Social and Economic Rights outlines this as “the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health,” but declarations such as this remain tragically unfulfilled. According to recent figures, roughly two billion people lack access to essential drugs or to primary health care. Millions are afflicted by infections and illnesses that are easily avoidable or treatable. In the developing world many children die or grow stunted and damaged for lack of available treatments. Tropical diseases receive little or no attention by the major pharmaceutical companies’ research departments. Is this a massive violation of the right to health? And if so, why does it attract so little attention? Is it because our supposed commitment to human rights and the rule of law is hypocritical and hollow? Or is it because the right to health is a special case of a right, so that these tragedies are no violation at all? Jennifer Prah Ruger summarized this puzzle when she wrote: “one would be hard pressed to find a more controversial or nebulous human right than the right to health.” In this essay I discuss three different theories of a right to health care. I conclude by offering my own reconstruction of one such theory.


1998 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-408 ◽  
Author(s):  

AbstractThe right to the highest attainable level of health or, briefly, the right to health is a fundamental human right, solidly embedded in international human rights law. As with other human rights, this right creates corresponding obligations for States which they are due to respect, protect and fulfil.The right to health embodies both positive and negative contents rights, ranging from the right to adequate protection of health to the right to equal access to health care. In addition, the right to health obliges States to create conditions favourable to the achievement and maintenance of the highest attainable level of health.This article describes and analyses national and international case law with respect to these three components of the right to health in an effort to delineate the general contours of this right. It is argued that courts and other (quasi-)judicial bodies more or less explicitly acknowledge that States are required to ensure a minimum level of health protection, (equal access to) essential health care and satisfaction of basic human needs. From the existing body of case law touching on the right to health it remains, however, difficult to conclude how courts define the minimum core content of the right to health, let alone to gain further insights into the normative meaning of this right.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleisha Ebrahimi

Abstract In recognition of the health benefits breastfeeding offers for both mother and child, breastfeeding has been acknowledged in various International Human Rights Law instruments. Furthermore, against the backdrop of aggressive formula milk marketing campaigns, significant soft law provisions contained within the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes 1981 regulate and control the promotion of breastmilk substitutes. Refugee camps, however, remain aligned with pre-code practice, as formula milk is often one of the first donations to arrive in camps. Mothers, who are still affected by historical formula marketing campaigns, receive formula milk and perceive its availability and distribution as an endorsement over breastfeeding. In this article, International Human Rights Law is analysed, within the framework of the principle of the best interests of the child, to determine if the choice to breastfeed should be protected as a human right and how the indiscriminate supply of formula milk interacts with this choice in refugee camps.


BESTUUR ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 44
Author(s):  
Saidah Fasihah Binti Che Yussoff ◽  
Rohaida Nordin

<p>Malaysia is likely to introduce new laws on freedom of information. However, the important questions are whether the said laws are effective and will have enough bite with the public looking forward to opening government policy. Freedom of information has developed under international human rights law as the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart knowledge and ideas through media, regardless of any frontier. This paper aims to examine freedom of expression under the international realm, scrutinize the said freedom in the Malaysian legal framework, and discuss the proposed enactment of freedom of information laws in Malaysia in conformity with international human rights law. This research uses the qualitative research method. This paper concludes that freedom of information in Malaysia is severely impeded by the enforcement of the Official Secret Act. This paper calls for the repeal or amendment to the Act in conformity with international standards.  </p><p><strong>Keywords</strong><strong>:</strong> Expression; Freedom; Expression; Human Right.</p>


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed R.M. Elshobake

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance with international human rights law. Design/methodology/approach Through doctrinal and legal study and content analysis, this paper analyses the important relevant legal provisions under International human rights law and applies these provisions to the reality of managing the COVID-19 crisis to identify the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 outbreak. This research paper considered as a review paper in that it provides a review of the most prominent measures taken during the COVID-19 crisis, which constitutes violations of international human rights law. Findings It is concluded that some measures that have been taken by countries to confront the COVID-19 pandemic have constituted violations of human rights and did not comply with the legal conditions to restrict human rights. Indeed, the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the ugly fractures in health-care systems, health inequities, racism and discrimination, Undermining the right to freedom of expression and the right to access information, gross negligence in protecting detainees from COVID-19 infection, all of these constitute clear violations of the principles of international human rights law. Research limitations/implications The spread of COVID-19 has not stopped, and its effects still continue, including human rights violations. Therefore, this paper cannot enumerate all human rights violations that occur during the spread of COVID-19. Practical implications Based on the results in this paper, governments need to be more prepared to face any health crisis at all levels including health care, which would reduce human rights violations. Social implications This research paper reflects positively on the social reality, as the adoption of its recommendations leads to the provision of adequate health care to all members of society in accordance with the principles of human rights, granting them the right to access information, protecting their right to freedom of expression, reducing the phenomenon of racism and discrimination and providing adequate health care to all detainees. Originality/value This paper studies an up-to-date topic that we are still living and seeing its effects. The benefit of this paper is to provide recommendations that protect human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document