European Union Global Health Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
André den Exter
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Shared Vision ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
Health Security ◽  
The Eu

The European Union is an important player in global health issues. This paper firstly explains the concept of EU global health law and then examines a number of areas where the EU acts and may influence, directly or indirectly, global health issues (eg, trade, public health, health migration, development aid, and health security). What follows is an attempt to tie up the threads more systematically by advocating a Global Health Convention, based on human rights principles. Such a shared vision on global health law may help the EU and Member States to respond more effectively to global health challenges such as international trade, public health security and health threats. In line with EU Council Conclusions 2010, the focus is on four dominant areas of EU law, explained in more detail. The variety of measures and activities embodies: external trade and global health; EU health law and external relations; health migration and development initiatives; global health security: the emerging health/security nexus. Author conclude that examining the EU’s role in the global health debate, has revealed a ‘hodgepodge’ of legal issues, rather than a distinct body of rules reflecting a coherent framework of EU law. As a result, its role in the global health is largely influenced by other policy areas than health. What is missing is a common global health policy. Communication 2010 provided key elements of what reflects a fragmented, highly compartmentalised approach. Balancing international trade and other economic interests with global health issues requires a shared vision and strategy what is global health. Here, it is argued that the EU should take the lead in drafting such a common policy based on previous experiences in close collaboration with the key global health actor: the WHO. Formulating and implementing a global health treaty at Member State level, a Framework Convention on Global Health could respond to trade, in a more systematic and coherent manner, reflecting international health law principles and specifying State obligations.

scholarly journals Assessing National Public Health Law to Prevent Infectious Disease Outbreaks: Immunization Law as a Basis for Global Health Security

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 412-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsion Berhane Ghedamu ◽  
Benjamin Mason Meier
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Infectious Disease ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Disease Outbreaks ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Global Health Security ◽  
Public Health Law ◽  
Health Security ◽  
National Immunization

Immunization plays a crucial role in global health security, preventing public health emergencies of international concern and protecting individuals from infectious disease outbreaks, yet these critical public health benefits are dependent on immunization law. Where public health law has become central to preventing, detecting, and responding to infectious disease, public health law reform is seen as necessary to implement the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA). This article examines national immunization laws as a basis to implement the GHSA and promote the public's health, analyzing the scope and content of these laws to prevent infectious disease across Sub-Saharan Africa. Undertaking policy surveillance of national immunization laws in 20 Sub-Saharan African countries, this study: (1) developed a legal framework to map the legal attributes relevant to immunization; (2) created an assessment tool to determine the presence of these attributes under national immunization law; and (3) applied this assessment tool to code national legal landscapes. An analysis of these coded laws highlights legal attributes that govern vaccine requirements, supply chains, vaccine administration standards, and medicines quality and manufacturer liability. Based upon this international policy surveillance, it will be crucial to undertake legal epidemiology research across countries, examining the influence of immunization law on vaccination rates and disease outbreaks.

scholarly journals Covid-19 Using Border Controls to Fight a Pandemic? Reflections From the European Union

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elspeth Guild
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
European Union ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Article 9 ◽  
Border Controls ◽  
The Eu

When Covid-19 was acknowledged to have arrived in Europe in February-March 2020, politicians and public health authorities scrabbled to find appropriate and effective responses to the challenges. The EU obligation contained in Article 9 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) requiring the EU (including the Member States to achieve a common protection on human health, however, seems to have been missing from the responses.) Instead, borders and their control became a site of substantial political debate across Europe as a possible venue for effective measures to limit the spread of the pandemic. While the most invasive Covid-19 measures have been within EU states, lockdown, closure of businesses etc., the cross-border aspects (limitations on cross border movement) have been important. In the European Union this had important consequences for EU law on border controls, in particular free movement of persons and the absence of controls among Schengen states. It also implicated border controls with third countries, including European Free Trade Area (EFTA and Switzerland) all states neighboring the EU, the UK (having left the EU on 1 January 2020) the Western Balkans and Turkey. While EU law distinguishes between Schengen borders where no control takes place on persons, non-Schengen EU borders, where controls take place but are limited to identity checks and border controls with third countries and external borders with third countries (non-EFTA or Swiss) the responses of many Member States and the EU institutions abandoned many aspects of these distinctions. Indeed, the difference between border controls between states (inside Schengen, the EU, EFTA, or outside) and internal restrictions on movement became increasingly blurred. Two approaches—public health and public policy—were applied simultaneously and not always in ways which were mutually coherent, or in any way consistent with the Article 9 TFEU commitment. While the public health approach to movement of persons is based on ensuring identification of those in need of treatment or possibly carrying the disease, providing treatment as quickly as possible or quarantine, the public policy approach is based on refusing entry to persons who are a risk irrespective of what that may mean in terms of propagating the pandemic in neighboring states or states of origin. I will examine here the ways in which the two approaches were applied in the EU from the perspective of EU law on border controls.

scholarly journals Examining National Public Health Law to Realize the Global Health Security Agenda

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Mason Meier ◽  
Kara Tureski ◽  
Emily Bockh ◽  
Derek Carr ◽  
Ana Ayala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Global Health Security ◽  
Public Health Law ◽  
Health Security ◽  
National Public Health ◽  
Global Health Security Agenda

Emancipating Health from the Internal Market: For a Stronger EU (Legislative) Competence in Public Health

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 747-756
Author(s):  
Vincent DELHOMME
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
General Public ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Relative Lack ◽  
Health Measures ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
The Eu

It is a striking feature of European Union (EU) health law and policy that it has developed in a relative lack of awareness from the general public. This situation can be partly explained by the existence of only a limited competence in the field and the recourse to other legal bases to enact public health measures, particularly Article 114 TFEU. The use of internal market powers to conduct EU health policy has given rise to several problems, affecting the legitimacy of EU action and its capacity to adequately protect human health. Only a Treaty change can provide the EU with the clear competence and the solid legislative powers that it needs to tackle the various health challenges that Europe faces and will continue to face.

EU COVID-19 Certificates: A Critical Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Iris GOLDNER LANG
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Green Certificates ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Cross Border Movement

On 17 March 2021, the European Commission put forward its Proposal for a Regulation on Digital Green Certificates, which would facilitate European Union (EU) cross-border movement during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Regulation on the EU Digital COVID Certificate was adopted on 14 June 2021 and it will start to apply from 1 July 2021. This article examines the main declared goals of the new Regulation – the first being that Digital COVID Certificates facilitate safe cross-border movement, the second being that they preclude more restrictive national measures, the third being that they prevent discrimination and the fourth being that they coordinate Member States’ actions. In so doing, it highlights the main benefits and weaknesses of the Regulation, but it also goes beyond the Regulation by tackling broader questions of EU law that will be of relevance even once the pandemic is over. In this respect, the paper highlights the importance of science in assessing the proportionality of pandemic-related measures and of choosing the least restrictive and the most individualised options when restricting free movement due to public health reasons. It also identifies the effects EU certificates will have on Member States’ regulation of national COVID-19 certificates, notably those designed for other purposes than cross-border travel, and it shows that there is a thin line between the EU’s and national competences in this area.

EU Health Law & Policy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anniek de Ruijter
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Human Health ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
Legal Principle ◽  
Legal Competence ◽  
The Eu

This book describes the expansion of EU power in health care and public health and analyses the implications of this expansion on EU health values and rights. The main conclusion of the book is that the EU is de facto balancing fundamental rights and values relating to health, implicitly taking on obligations for safeguarding fundamental rights in the field of health and affecting individuals’ rights sometimes without an explicit legal competence to do so. This brings to light instances where EU health policy has implications for fundamental rights and values without the possibility to challenge the exercise of power of the EU in human health. This begs the question of whether subsidiarity is still the most relevant legal principle for the division of powers and tasks among the Member States, particularly when EU policy and law involves the politically sensitive areas of health care and public health. This question draws out the parameter for continuing the debate on the role of the European Union in promoting its own values and the wellbeing of its peoples, in light of its ever-growing role in human health issues.

A Union of Peoples

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavlos Eleftheriadis
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Domestic Institutions ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rival Theory ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
The Eu

This book offers a legal and political theory of the European Union. Many political and legal philosophers compare the EU to a federal union. They believe that its basic laws should be subject to the standards of constitutional law. They thus find it lacking or incomplete. This book offers a rival theory. If one looks more closely at the treaties and the precedents of the European courts, one sees that the substance of EU law is international, not constitutional. Just like international law, it applies primarily to the relations between states. It binds domestic institutions directly only when the local constitutions allow it. The member states have democratically chosen to adapt their constitutional arrangements in order to share legislative and executive powers with their partners. The legal architecture of the European Union is thus best understood under a theory of dualism and not pluralism. According to this internationalist view, EU law is part of the law of nations and its distinction from domestic law is a matter of substance, not form. This arrangement is supported by a cosmopolitan theory of international justice, which we may call progressive internationalism. The EU is a union of democratic peoples, that freely organize their interdependence on the basis of principles of equality and reciprocity. Its central principles are not the principles of a constitution, but cosmopolitan principles of accountability, liberty, and fairness,

Communicable and Other Infectious Diseases

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Frischhut
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Disease Transmission ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Ethical Perspective ◽  
Health Measures ◽  
Environment Agency ◽  
And Control

This chapter discusses the most important features of EU law on infectious diseases. Communicable diseases not only cross borders, they also often require measures that cross different areas of policy because of different vectors for disease transmission. The relevant EU law cannot be attributed to one sectoral policy only, and thus various EU agencies participate in protecting public health. The key agency is the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Other important agencies include the European Environment Agency; European Food Safety Authority; and the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency. However, while integration at the EU level has facilitated protection of the public's health, it also has created potential conflicts among the different objectives of the European Union. The internal market promotes the free movement of products, but public health measures can require restrictions of trade. Other conflicts can arise if protective public health measures conflict with individual human rights. The chapter then considers risk assessment and the different tools of risk management used in dealing with the challenges of infectious diseases. It also turns to the external and ethical perspective and the role the European Union takes in global health.

Review by Constitutional Courts of the Obligation of National Courts of Last Instance to Refer a Preliminary Question to the Court of Justice of the EU

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 1663-1700 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clelia Lacchi
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Member States ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Remedy ◽  
The Eu

The Constitutional Courts of a number of Member States exert a constitutional review on the obligation of national courts of last instance to make a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).Pursuant to Article 267(3) TFEU, national courts of last instance, namely courts or tribunals against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, are required to refer to the CJEU for a preliminary question related to the interpretation of the Treaties or the validity and interpretation of acts of European Union (EU) institutions. The CJEU specified the exceptions to this obligation inCILFIT. Indeed, national courts of last instance have a crucial role according to the devolution to national judges of the task of ensuring, in collaboration with the CJEU, the full application of EU law in all Member States and the judicial protection of individuals’ rights under EU law. With preliminary references as the keystone of the EU judicial system, the cooperation of national judges with the CJEU forms part of the EU constitutional structure in accordance with Article 19(1) TEU.

Legal conflict between the EU and the republic of Poland regarding polish judicial reform

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Yakovyuk ◽  
Suzanna Asiryan ◽  
Anastasiya Lazurenko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Eu

Problem setting. On October 7, 2021, the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland ruled in favor of Polish law over European Union law, which in the long run may violate the principles according to which the Union operates and the rights enjoyed by citizens of the state. Such a precedent can further serve as a basis for identical decisions of the bodies of constitutional jurisdiction of those states that have problems in fulfilling their obligations in the European community. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The problems of the functioning of the bodies of the European Union, the implementation of their decisions and the general status in EU law are widely studied in national science. In particular, many scholars have studied the legal nature of the EU, including: TM Anakina, VI Muravyov, NM Ushakov, A. Ya. Kapustina, NA Korolyova, Yu. Yumashev, BN Topornin, OYa Tragniuk, SS Seliverstov, IV Yakovyuk and others. Target of research is to establish the foundations of EU law in the functioning of Union bodies, especially the Court, as well as to determine the hierarchy of national law and EU law. Article’s main body. Over the years, the Court has, within its jurisdiction, issued a large number of judgments which have become the source of the Union’s Constituent Treaties and of EU law in general. Over the last two decades, the powers of the Court of Justice have changed significantly. In particular, this is due to the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, which amended the EU’s founding treaties on the powers of the Court, then the reform of the European Court took place in 2015-2016, which concerned a change in the organizational structure of the Court. Despite the generally well-established case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the unification of the observance by the Member States of the basic principles of the European Union, the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland adopted a decision on 7 October. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Following the decision of the Constitutional Court, the Polish authorities found themselves in a situation that significantly complicated its internal and external situation. The way out of which requires answers to fundamental questions about the legal nature of the EU. Undoubtedly, this is an issue not only between Poland and the EU, but also between other member states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document