Global public health law: implications for development policy

2021 ◽  
pp. 293-301
Author(s):  
George F. Tomossy
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Pratik DIXIT

There is no time more opportune to review the workings of the International Health Regulations (IHR) than the present COVID-19 crisis. This article analyses the theoretical and practical aspects of international public health law (IPHL), particularly the IHR, to argue that it is woefully unprepared to protect human rights in times of a global public health crisis. To rectify this, the article argues that the IHR should design effective risk reduction and response strategies by incorporating concepts from international disaster law (IDL). Along similar lines, this article suggests that IDL also has a lot to learn from IPHL in terms of greater internationalisation and institutionalisation. Institutionalisation of IDL on par with IPHL will provide it with greater legitimacy, transparency and accountability. This article argues that greater cross-pollination of ideas between IDL and IPHL is necessary in order to make these disciplines more relevant for the future.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Petelos

Abstract The WHO has highlighted the technical challenges of assessing immunity status, cautioning against immunity passports. Similarly, the ECDC indicated that “current scientific knowledge that exists on the immunological response to SARS-CoV-2 (quality, quantity and duration of human antibodies) or the available testing methods (laboratory based and point-of-care)” does not support their use. Accordingly, the European Commission has emphasised the risks compulsory testing, noting that “border control [is not] an effective measure to limit the transmission of the virus, while the Council of Europe raises awareness of the interference of SARS-CoV-2 measures on human rights, underlining that “the major social, political and legal challenge facing our Member States will be their ability to respond to this crisis effectively, whilst ensuring that the measures they take do not undermine our genuine long-term interest in safeguarding Europe's founding values of human rights, democracy and the rule of law”. Nevertheless, immunity passports and immunity registries are being discussed more than ever before, with governments under pressure to find a viable solution. This presentation will examine the GDPR, and current legislation protecting rights vs. legislation allowing testing, quarantine, administration of medicines, recording of immunity vs. vaccination. It will debate the legal nature of immunity passports and the relevance to fundamental European freedoms, linking key concepts to global public health law. Implications regarding the personal right in Health/right of Public Health and legal substance and human rights limitations will also be examined. Criteria and the use of immunity passports as limitations of human rights -prescribed by law, legitimate aim and necessary in a democratic society- with extrapolation in terms of discrimination will be discussed. Finally, the jurisprudential approach and control (national, European, ECHR, global) will be mentioned, along with a brief highlight to the implications for migrant populations and cross-border care.


Medicne pravo ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-22
Author(s):  
Andre den Exter ◽  
◽  
Alexey Goryainov ◽  

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 499-505 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer K. Ibrahim ◽  
Scott Burris ◽  
Scott Hays

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (S1) ◽  
pp. 35-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Davis

This article outlines the author's experience designing and implementing an asynchronous online course. Designed as a complement to public health law externships at any location, the course addresses professionalism and strategic lawyering. The article further describes the author's fellowship journey, which emboldened her view that faculty must attempt to live the expectations we have for our students, and also declare our professional values, especially when teaching about policymaking which is fraught with values conflicts. It concludes with a call for others to pilot innovative teaching approaches to address both the crisis in legal education and pressing societal issues, thereby contributing to the health of our legal community.


2002 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 334-337
Author(s):  
V. Harpwood

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (S4) ◽  
pp. 86-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Smith Thiel

In recent years, public health law has seen some important court decisions. Those are presented below.In Pelman v. McDonaldS Corporation, the court dismissed a complaint filed by three children who claimed that McDonald’s practices in making and selling its products were deceptive. This deception, the children alleged, caused them to consume McDonald’s products with great frequency and become obese, thereby injuring their health. The plaintiffs pled five causes of action against McDonald’s, alleging that McDonald’s: 1) failed to adequately disclose the ingredients and health effects of its products and described their food as nutritious without disclosing detrimental health effects; 2) engaged in marketing techniques geared toward inducing children to consume their products; 3) acted negligently in selling foods high in fat, cholesterol, salt, and sugar when studies show that foods containing these ingredients cause obesity and detrimental health effects; 4) failed to warn consumers of the quantity and qualities of levels of fat, cholesterol, salt, and sugar in its products or of the detrimental health effects of such foods; and 5) acted negligently in marketing foods that were physically and psychologically addictive.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document