Interpreting the Right to Health: Legal Obligations for Bio-Risk Management and Pandemic Prevention
(2024) JAMM07 20241Faculty of Law
Department of Law
- Abstract
- This thesis seeks to answer the question of whether obligations to primary pandemic prevention and bio-risk management can be derived from the human right to health. The definition of the right to health in Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) was selected, as it is the broadest definition of the right to health in international human rights law and because the convention is widely ratified.
The introduction explains primary pandemic prevention and bio-risk management, the causes of heightened risk, and the recommended actions to mitigate this risk. It furthermore establishes the research question and objectives, underscoring the relevance of primary pandemic prevention in the... (More) - This thesis seeks to answer the question of whether obligations to primary pandemic prevention and bio-risk management can be derived from the human right to health. The definition of the right to health in Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) was selected, as it is the broadest definition of the right to health in international human rights law and because the convention is widely ratified.
The introduction explains primary pandemic prevention and bio-risk management, the causes of heightened risk, and the recommended actions to mitigate this risk. It furthermore establishes the research question and objectives, underscoring the relevance of primary pandemic prevention in the contemporary global health landscape. It situates the study within the broader context of human rights and public health, highlighting the limited amount of existing legal scholarship. The methodological approach adopted in the thesis is primarily doctrinal legal research with a brief consideration of critical and interdisciplinary perspectives. Since the relevant treaty body has considered no relevant cases, the thesis includes six cases from regional human rights systems to serve as interpretative guidance. The doctrinal analysis centers on interpretation of content and interpretation of ICESCR Art. 12 and the following cases (which all concern the right to health in other human rights conventions); Ogoni v. Nigeria (2001): D. R. Congo v. Burundi, Rwanda, and Uganda (2003): Gonzales Lluy v. Ecuador (2015): Advisory Opinion OC-23/17 (2017): Vavřička and Others v. Czech Republic (2021): Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland (2024).
The chapter Academic Perspectives provides an overview of selected interdisciplinary scholarship and diverse perspectives on the right to health, pandemic prevention, and the environmental dimension. It discusses the evolution of health rights in international law and examines examples of previous pandemics to understand the role of legal obligations in health crises. This section integrates theoretical insights from prominent scholars, including but not limited to, Lawrence Gostin, Benjamin Mason Meier, and Jonathan Mann, who emphasize the integration of human rights into public health strategies. Their perspectives underscore the importance of a rights-based approach to pandemic prevention, ensuring that health measures are equitable and respectful of individual rights.
The synthesis is the final section of the thesis and outlines key obligations derived from the analysis:
1. States must manage environmental factors to reduce pandemic risks, regulate industries to prevent pollution and ensure sustainable land use.
2. States have an obligation to collaborate across borders, share information, and coordinate responses in order to effectively prevent future pandemics.
3. Governments must ensure public access to information and involve communities in decision-making processes to mitigate health risks.
4. States should adopt precautionary measures in areas with significant but uncertain risks, such as forest conservation and wildlife protection.
5. Legal frameworks must balance protecting public health and respecting individual rights, as illustrated by the necessity of measures like vaccination.
6. States must provide effective remedies and uphold fair trial rights to hold governments accountable for inadequate health risk management.
The thesis concludes that proactive environmental management, international cooperation, transparency, precautionary measures, balanced legal frameworks, and accountability are crucial for comprehensive pandemic preparedness. By integrating these obligations, states can develop resilient health systems capable of reducing the risk of future pandemics while respecting and promoting human rights. (Less) - Popular Abstract
- This thesis seeks to answer the question of whether obligations to primary pandemic prevention and bio-risk management can be derived from the human right to health. The definition of the right to health in Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) was selected, as it is the broadest definition of the right to health in international human rights law and because the convention is widely ratified. This is done by analyzing and discussing relevant case law and academic literature. I conclude that such obligations can be derived from the right to health.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9175527
- author
- Kjær Andersen, Kirstine LU
- supervisor
-
- Anna Nilsson LU
- organization
- course
- JAMM07 20241
- year
- 2024
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- keywords
- Pandemic, Right to Health, Human rights, Human right to health, primary pandemic prevention, bio-risk management
- language
- English
- id
- 9175527
- date added to LUP
- 2024-09-27 14:23:07
- date last changed
- 2024-09-27 14:23:07
@misc{9175527,
abstract = {{This thesis seeks to answer the question of whether obligations to primary pandemic prevention and bio-risk management can be derived from the human right to health. The definition of the right to health in Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) was selected, as it is the broadest definition of the right to health in international human rights law and because the convention is widely ratified.
The introduction explains primary pandemic prevention and bio-risk management, the causes of heightened risk, and the recommended actions to mitigate this risk. It furthermore establishes the research question and objectives, underscoring the relevance of primary pandemic prevention in the contemporary global health landscape. It situates the study within the broader context of human rights and public health, highlighting the limited amount of existing legal scholarship. The methodological approach adopted in the thesis is primarily doctrinal legal research with a brief consideration of critical and interdisciplinary perspectives. Since the relevant treaty body has considered no relevant cases, the thesis includes six cases from regional human rights systems to serve as interpretative guidance. The doctrinal analysis centers on interpretation of content and interpretation of ICESCR Art. 12 and the following cases (which all concern the right to health in other human rights conventions); Ogoni v. Nigeria (2001): D. R. Congo v. Burundi, Rwanda, and Uganda (2003): Gonzales Lluy v. Ecuador (2015): Advisory Opinion OC-23/17 (2017): Vavřička and Others v. Czech Republic (2021): Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland (2024).
The chapter Academic Perspectives provides an overview of selected interdisciplinary scholarship and diverse perspectives on the right to health, pandemic prevention, and the environmental dimension. It discusses the evolution of health rights in international law and examines examples of previous pandemics to understand the role of legal obligations in health crises. This section integrates theoretical insights from prominent scholars, including but not limited to, Lawrence Gostin, Benjamin Mason Meier, and Jonathan Mann, who emphasize the integration of human rights into public health strategies. Their perspectives underscore the importance of a rights-based approach to pandemic prevention, ensuring that health measures are equitable and respectful of individual rights.
The synthesis is the final section of the thesis and outlines key obligations derived from the analysis:
1. States must manage environmental factors to reduce pandemic risks, regulate industries to prevent pollution and ensure sustainable land use.
2. States have an obligation to collaborate across borders, share information, and coordinate responses in order to effectively prevent future pandemics.
3. Governments must ensure public access to information and involve communities in decision-making processes to mitigate health risks.
4. States should adopt precautionary measures in areas with significant but uncertain risks, such as forest conservation and wildlife protection.
5. Legal frameworks must balance protecting public health and respecting individual rights, as illustrated by the necessity of measures like vaccination.
6. States must provide effective remedies and uphold fair trial rights to hold governments accountable for inadequate health risk management.
The thesis concludes that proactive environmental management, international cooperation, transparency, precautionary measures, balanced legal frameworks, and accountability are crucial for comprehensive pandemic preparedness. By integrating these obligations, states can develop resilient health systems capable of reducing the risk of future pandemics while respecting and promoting human rights.}},
author = {{Kjær Andersen, Kirstine}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Interpreting the Right to Health: Legal Obligations for Bio-Risk Management and Pandemic Prevention}},
year = {{2024}},
}