SOMMARIO: 1. La funzione sociale della proprietà e la questione della tenuta del progetto costituzionale. -2. I diritti fondamentali fra strategie neoliberali e slanci trasformativi. -3. La funzione sociale quale connotato della proprietà nel social. -4. La funzione sociale delle proprietà nel contesto neoliberale. -5. What's next? (Funzione sociale e beni comuni).

The future of economic and social rights is unlikely to resemble its past. Neglected within the human rights movement, avoided by courts, and subsumed within a conception of development in which economic growth was considered a necessary (and, by some, sufficient) condition for rights fulfillment, economic and social rights enjoyed an uncertain status in international human rights law and in the public laws of most countries. Yet today, under conditions of immense poverty, insecurity, and social distress, the rights to education, health care, housing, social security, food, water, and sanitation are increasingly at the top of the human rights agenda. Economic and social rights are now present in most of the world’s constitutions, most of the main human rights covenants, and are often given an explicit justiciable status. At the same time, as different legal traditions and regions embrace this shift, their highly integrated economies face a profound reckoning with economic justice. The future cannot be predicted; but neither can it be ignored. This introduction to a book with 21 chapters incorporates a detailed examination of constitutions, courts and international mechanisms of accountability. These signal a transformation in debates about human rights, democracy, law and development.

This paper demonstrated that laws that criminalise sex work or aspects thereof are associated with negative outcomes for sex workers’ right to health under international law. It also showed that the right to health is an underused mechanism in judicial challenges to these laws.

The objective was to analyse, at practical and judicial levels, the relationship between prohibitory prostitution laws and the right to health. International treaties were examined to establish the relevant content of the right. Studies of the health-related effects of these laws, in various jurisdictions, were reviewed. Existing research into the effects of legalising prostitution under specified circumstances, and the effects of decriminalisation, was also examined. Case law was reviewed of judicial challenges to prostitution laws, and health-related aspects of relevant cases were discussed. The reasons that each court did or did not reach a decision protecting sex workers’ right to health were also considered.

The dissertation found that prohibitory laws lead to negative consequences for sex workers’ health by increasing their risk of violence and sexually-transmitted infections; adversely affecting their mental health, through these risks and through stigmatisation; denying them occupational health and safety; and excluding them from the process by which health-affecting decisions are made. It found positive health outcomes from removal of these laws, although excessive regulation of legal prostitution can have negative effects. It also found insufficient justification for health-based arguments in favour of prohibitory laws.

It showed that only a small number of challenges to these laws have highlighted their relationship to health, and the basis of these challenges has not been the right to health itself, although a breach of a derivative right has sometimes been asserted. Health has also, at times, served as a defence to these laws.
It concluded that sex workers’ right to health can best be protected through a legal framework that decriminalises consensual commercial sex and explicitly protects their occupational health and safety rights. This must be accompanied by efforts to ameliorate stigmatisation. Judicial action can play a role, although it may require the assertion of a derivative right rather than the right to health.

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa. Il consenso informato nella sintesi tra diritto e dovere alla salute. -2. I fondamenti costituzionali del consenso informato e il contributo decisivo della Corte costituzionale. -3. Gli sviluppi del consenso informato nella giurisprudenza della Corte di cassazione. -4. La legge n. 219 del 2017 come prima disciplina organica in materia di consenso informato. -5. La valorizzazione dell'autodeterminazione del paziente tra "consenso informato", "disposizioni anticipate di trattamento" e "pianificazione condivisa delle cure". -6. I caratteri dell'informazione e la consapevolezza della scelta personale del paziente. -7. Rapporto medico-paziente: tra "alleanza terapeutica" e vincolatività delle d isposizioni di volontà del paziente sulle cure. Assenza di una disciplina dell'obiezione di coscienza per il medico. -8. Osservazioni conclusive. Una legge necessaria, destinata ad essere integrata dalla prassi.

This Report offers a critical
interpretation of the idea of ‘minimum core obligations’
associated with the right to health in international,
regional and domestic law and practice. Two important
methodological complexities affecting this project need to
be highlighted from the very outset. First, it cannot be
assumed that all uses of expressions such as ‘the human
right to health’, ‘the right to health’, or ‘minimum core
obligations’ bear the same meaning. Second, in seeking to
identify the role played by the idea of minimum core
obligations in the law and practice relating to the right to
health in various jurisdictions, we must distinguish the
concept of such obligations from the use of the words
‘minimum core obligations’. The structure of this report is
as follows. In Part II the idea of minimum core obligations
corresponding to the right to health is examined as it
manifests itself in international law and practice. Parts II
and III consider how the same doctrine manifests itself in
the context of regional legal orders (II) and state law and
practice (III). Given the enormous volume of material
potentially relevant here, these latter two parts are
necessarily highly selective, with a focus on some of the
most fertile cases for grasping the bearing on the minimum
core doctrine on the right to health. Finally, in Part IV,
the potential role of the minimum core obligations with
respect to the right to health are highlighted with respect
to development, focusing in particular on their bearing on
the Sustainable Development Goals, priority-setting more
generally, and the use of indicators.

The newly adopted Constitution of the Republic of Zimbabwe ushers in a new constitutional dispensation based upon a set of key constitutional principles. Such principles include the rule of law, judiciary independence, multipartism, government transparency and accountability, respect for fundamental human rights, constitutional supremacy and the doctrine of limited government, judicial review and constitutional separation of powers. Whilst it is true that these principles were provided for under the old Constitution, this book notes that the new Constitution has widened and deepened the scope of these principles. For instance, the new Constitution introduces a constitutional dispensation based upon a wider Declaration of Rights, which unlike the previous one, provides for socio-economic and cultural rights as fundamental rights.

The first chapter of this book briefly discusses how these constitutional principles are provided for under the new Constitution of Zimbabwe and how they should shape the new constitutionalism in Zimbabwe. The book proceeds to identify the socio-economic and cultural rights provided for under the new Constitution of the Republic of Zimbabwe.The book also discusses the principles guiding the interpretation of the Declaration of Rights, enforcement as well as limitation of these rights and possible remedies against the limitation of these socio-economic and cultural rights.

With reference to international law, decisions of superior foreign courts, the Zimbabwean jurisprudence as well as relevant academic works, this book provides a commentary on each socio-economic right; discussing the general meaning, scope and content of each of these rights. In examining the content and scope of these rights, this book extensively relies on academic works, international and foreign law because the
Zimbabwean jurisprudence on these rights is still very young since the new Constitution is just one year old at the time of publishing this book. However, the local jurisprudence has been used as far as possible in providing these commentaries.

It is our hope as authors of this book that this will be a useful tool in guiding lawyers, government officials, students, the judiciary and citizens as they seek to engage with and enforce the Declaration of Rights, particularly the socio-economic and cultural rights enshrined therein.

Justice Alfred Mavedzenge
Douglas Coltart
26 September 2014

This article has been published by the journal Transnational Legal Theory (http://www.hartjournals.co.uk/TLT). The article is an expanded and revised version of the lecture I gave at the opening plenary session of the 24th IVR World Congress in Beijing, September 2009, which was entitled and previously uploaded as ‘Human Rights in a New World Order.’ The unrevised ‘Human Rights in a New World Order’ speech will appear in the IVR proceedings as well as in translation in Chinese. The present article is made available for download here immediately after publication by special arrangement with the journal. The article is a reflection on the importance and some of the problems involved with the practice of human rights in international relations in the age of globalization. Beginning with rights in general to claim that their justification is in protecting and advancing individual interest, and distributing power to individuals. This is the main distinctive contribution of human rights in the international arena: they empower individuals, and voluntary organizations, endowing them with a voice alongside states and multinational corporations, and creating an additional channel of political action. I argue that human rights recognized in human rights law and practice are not universal rights, but they are syncronically universal, pertaining to all human beings alive today. I explain and justify that feature by the fact that human rights set a limit to state sovereignty. This fact makes clear the importance of impartial, efficient and reliable institutions for administering and enforcing human rights. Where such institutions are impossible there are no human right. Even when they are possible we face the risk that the practice of human rights would lead to an international regime which is blind to cultural diversity, and tends to serve the interests of big businesses and nothing more. This - I claim - is not something inseparable from the idea of human rights, but it confronts its practice with as yet unresolved problems. The human rights to education and to health are used to illustrate the points made in the paper.

Do unauthorized im/migrants have a right to health? Do they deserve health care, or health protection, or access to the social determinants of good health? Are they party to prevailing social contracts, or does their exclusion from mainstream systems of health promotion, prevention, and care “make sense”? Questions like these, which generate considerable attention in multiple spheres of scholarship, policy, and public debate, revolve around an issue that merits substantially greater consideration among social scientists of health: health-related “deservingness.” In addition to putting the issue of health-related deservingness squarely on the map as an object of analysis, the paper further argues that we cannot focus solely on those with power, influence, and public voice. Rather, we also must investigate how deservingness is reckoned in relation to – and, furthermore, from the perspectives of – unauthorized im/migrants and members of other groups commonly constructed in public and policy discourse as undeserving. Additionally, we must also examine the complicated relationship between universalizing juridical arguments about formal entitlement to health rights, on one hand, and situationally specific, vernacular moral arguments about deservingness, on the other.

KEYWORDS: Israel – unauthorized im/migration – im/migrant health – “illegality” – deservingness – health care access – idioms of social justice mobilization – renegade moralities

Winner of the 2012 Rudolf Virchow Professional Prize -  Critical Anthropology of Global Health Caucus, Society for Medical Anthropology

ABSTRACT: "As the notion of a “right to health" gains influence, it is increasingly deployed in ways that are diverse, contextually variable, and at times logically inconsistent. Drawing upon extended fieldwork at an Israeli human rights organization that advocates for “illegal” migrants and other vulnerable groups, this article contends that medical anthropologists cannot simply rally behind this right. Instead, we must take it as an object of ethnographic analysis and explore how it is invoked, debated, and resisted in specific contexts. Critical ethnographies of right to health discourse and practice can enlighten us, and help us enlighten scholars in other fields, to the complexity, messiness, and “mushiness” (Sen 2009) of this right, especially in the context of advocacy on unauthorized im/migrants' behalf. It can also deepen understanding of the complicated and sometimes tense relationships among human rights, humanitarianism, and other "idioms of social justice mobilization," especially in the health domain.

Keywords: right to health – migrant “illegality”– im/migrant health – human rights – idioms of social justice mobilization""

La gestión global de la seguridad alimentaria es tema prioritario en la agenda de los organismos internacionales comprometidos con la erradicación del hambre y la protección de la salud (como FAO y OMS), así como en la de todos los países que quieren lograr un sistema más coherente de reacción a las crisis alimentarias y de control eficaz de la cadena alimentaria. En ese marco, uno de los primeros desafíos que se plantea a escala mundial es garantizar la inocuidad, salud y calidad de los alimentos. 1

In recent years, Ireland has seen the emergence of a well-organised campaign to introduce legislation that criminalises the purchase, but not the sale, of sexual services. While a domestic consensus has seemingly formed in favour of client criminalisation, global health and human rights bodies have increasingly taken a contrary position: that neither party to a commercial sex transaction should be criminalised, at least where the parties are adults and the exchange takes place on a voluntary basis.

This paper sets out the international legal basis for this alternative consensus among actors in the international health and human rights sectors. It argues against client criminalisation from a human rights perspective, focusing on sex workers' right to health. After a brief introduction to the right to health in international law, it sets out various elements of the right to health that are implicated in the proposal to criminalise sex workers' clients. Using examples from research in countries that penalise the purchase of sex - directly or indirectly - it shows how these laws may jeopardise the health of sex workers in a number of ways, impairing their right to health under international law. It considers and rebuts the argument that client criminalisation actually promotes the right to health, showing this to rest on unsupportable ideological assumptions and flawed interpretations of human rights law. Finally, it briefly examines an alternative model - that of New Zealand, in which neither sex workers nor their clients are criminalised, and sex work is treated as a form of labour.

"Pathologies of Power uses harrowing stories of illness, of life—and death—in extreme situations to interrogate our understanding of human rights. Paul Farmer, a physician and anthropologist with twenty years of experience studying diseases in Haiti, Peru, and Russia, argues that promoting the social and economic rights of the world’s poor is the most important human rights struggle of our times. A thoughtful memoir with passionate eyewitness accounts from the prisons of Russia and the beleaguered villages of Haiti and Chiapas, this book links the lived experiences of individual victims to a broader analysis of structural violence. Farmer challenges conventional thinking within human rights circles and exposes the relationships between political and economic injustice, on one hand, and the suffering and illness of the powerless, on the other.Farmer shows that the same social forces that give rise to epidemic diseases such as HIV and tuberculosis also sculpt risk for human rights violations. He illustrates the ways that racism and gender inequality in the United States are mirrored in pathology, plague, disease and death. Yet this doctor’s autobiography is far from a hopeless inventory of human suffering. Farmer’s disturbing examples are linked to a guarded optimism that new medical and social technologies will develop in tandem with a more informed sense of social justice. Otherwise, he concludes, we will be guilty of managing social inequality rather than addressing structural violence. Farmer’s urgent plea to think about human rights in the context of global public health and to consider critical issues of quality and access for the world’s poor should be of fundamental concern to pathologists, medical students, and humanitarians in a world characterized by the bizarre proximity of surfeit and suffering."

Nota introductoria: interacciones entre la Bioética y el derecho a la salud:
La salud es un derecho humano fundamental e indispensable para el ejercicio de los demás derechos humanos. La génesis de esta contribución radica en la exploración del vínculo existente entre las diversas disciplinas, las cuales convergen en el abordaje de los dilemas de reflexión Bioética. Existe un acercamiento de estas reflexiones con el derecho a la salud, este último concebido como un derecho humano fundamental a la protección y acceso a la atención de la salud.  Todo ser humano tiene derecho al disfrute del más alto nivel posible de salud que le permita vivir dignamente.

Io non credo che vi sia un diritto di morire, così come non v'è propriamente un diritto alla felicità, per il semplice fatto che i diritti riguardano libertà relative a determinati ambiti di scelta. Allo stesso modo non v'è un diritto generale di libertà, ma solo libertà specifiche. In questo caso l'ambito di scelta non è quello della vita o della morte, ma quello di essere curato o meno o di esserlo in un modo o in un altro. Affermare l'esistenza di un generale diritto di morire vuol dire usare il linguaggio dei diritti in modo improprio e manifestamente ideologico. Bisogna evitare i diritti-manifesto se vogliamo restare nell'ambito del diritto.

el cannabis es una planta milenaria, utilizada a lo largo de la historia humana tanto en Oriente como Occidente, no obstante, su criminalización depende del contexto social, cultural e histórico.  Fue usada durante la edad antigua con fines industriales, medicinales y recreativos, se prohibió a partir de la inquisición, no obstante, con la conquista de los mares a partir de la edad moderna Estados como Inglaterra, Holanda, Noruega, entre otra autorización su cultivo para la producción de cáñamo. El estatus legal del cannabis fue mantenido hasta mediados del siglo XX, cuando las políticas en contra de las drogas empezaron a emergen especialmente en Estados Unidos, y al ser el país hegemónico, después de la segunda guerra mundial, sus políticas antidrogas influyeron en gran medida en la consolidación del sistema internacional antidrogas de la ONU, cuyo resultado fue la Declaración única de estupefacientes de 1961, misma que estableció una clasificación de las drogas, y el cannabis fue considerado una droga suave, cuyo cultivo y consumo es criminalizado a nivel mundial, sin embargo su  producción y  comercialización es permitido con fines medicinales y de investigación científica, lamentablemente existe una tendencia a permitir dichas actividades únicamente a las empresas farmacéuticas. Las políticas prohibicionistas del cannabis no han tenido los efectos esperados, porque tal como señala el reporte sobre el consumo de drogas de la ONU de 2016, el cannabis es la droga más consumida a nivel mundial, así mismo la prohibición ha generado la producción ilegal del cannabis, asociada al narcotráfico y sus delitos y la producción de cannabis sintético cuyos efectos secundarios son nocivos para la salud. Es así que países como Holanda, Israel, Canadá, República Checa han regularizado el cannabis, pero Uruguay es el primer país es legalizar las actividades relacionadas al cannabis, el  principal argumento fue los temas relacionados a la salud pública, porque los usuarios tienen el derecho a consumir un producto que cumpla con los requisitos mínimos de calidad y sanidad, las estadísticas han demostrado que a partir de la regularización o legalización el índice de consumo es menor y los efectos nocivos del cannabis sintético se han reducido, es por esto que en este ensayo se propone la legalización del cannabis en base a principios del bioderecho, que actúan como estándar para garantizar el ejercicio del derecho a la salud.

Son dönemde, toplumumuzda, sağlık sistemimizde yaygın biçimde tartışılmakta olan, yurt içinde ve yurt dışında yazılı ve görsel basın-yayın organlarında yüzlerce haberlere konu olan gebeliğin sonlandırılması, kürtaj, sezaryen konusunda yapılan beyanlar ve ülkemizde yaşanan olgular kamuoyunda geniş yankı bulmuş; bilimsel bilgi ve verilere başvurma ihtiyacı ortaya çıkmış; uzmanlık dernekleri (1, , meslek örgütleri (4) sivil toplum kuruluşları kamuoyuna açıklamalar yapmışlardır. Bu bağlamda, konunun insan haklarını ve hekimlik uygulamalarında değer sorunlarını doğrudan ilgilendirmesi nedeniyle; biyoetiğin ana meselelerinden olan, yaşamın başlangıcındaki bazı tıp etiği ikilemlerini ve değer sorunlarını, yaşamın değeri bakış açısıyla ele alan Türkiye Biyoetik Derneği Görüşü oluşturulmuştur.

t h e w o r l d b a n k g r o u p g o a l s t h e w o r l d b a n k g r o u p g o a l s Two ambitious goals, achieved in a sustainable way, will anchor our mission of a world free of poverty g oal 1 end extreme poverty 2010 2030 target To reduce the percentage of people in this world living with less than US $1.25 a day to 3 percent by 2030 poor people everywhere matter regardless of their country's size, income level, or location More than 1 billion people in the world live in desperate conditions suffering in extreme poverty with less than $1.25 a day 0 20 40 60 80 100

After a brief outline of the African Human Rights System, the paper analyses the human right to health enshrined in Article 16 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR). In particular, it deals with the effective implementation of the human right to health in the African national orders. The Guidelines on the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Africa, the practice of the African Commission and, mainly, the practice of the States Parties to the ACHPR help to lead the analysis in greater depth. As for the State practice, particular attention is paid to the implementation of the human right to health during the Ebola Crisis in the Western African States. The conclusion about the effective domestic implementation of the human right to health follows. Introductorily, the paper also focuses on the legal perspective adopted in order to develop the research.

RESUMEN: El presente ensayo es de tipo explicativo, descriptivo y argumentativo cuyo objeto principal es evidenciar la importancia del consentimiento informado, que actúa como garantía para el ejercicio del derecho a la salud. Los métodos utilizados son el exegético para demostrar y comprender la importancia del principio de autonomía y su principio derivado del consentimiento informado en el ordenamiento jurídico y en lo específico en la relación médico paciente. Así mismo se utiliza el método de derecho comparado y de análisis del caso para examinar dos sentencias una de la Corte IDH y otro del TEDH con el objetivo de evidenciar como en la realidad material o práctica se desnaturaliza y descontextualiza el consentimiento informado de los pacientes violentando sus derechos. PALABRAS CLAVE: principio de autonomía, consentimiento informado, derecho a la salud, bioderecho, contrato, servicios de salud. ABSTRACT: This essay is clarifying, descriptive and argumentative, whose main objective is to demonstrate the importance of informed consent, which acts as a guarantee for the deployment of the right to health. The essay methodologies are: exegetical to demonstrate and understand the importance of the principle of autonomy and the informed consent principle in the legal system, and in the doctor-patient relationship. It also uses the comparative and the case brief method to examine two resolutions: one of the InterAmerican human rights Court and another of the ECHR, to show that the Informent consent in the daily practice can be decontextualized violating human rights.

Consenso informato, diritti umani e biodiritto internazionale * S N : . Introduzione,  -. Origini storiche e fonti internazionali del principio del consenso informato,  -. La portata del principio del consenso: voluntas aegroti suprema lex,  -. Consenso informato e diritti umani alla luce del rapporto tra biodiritto internazionale e diritto internazionale dei diritti umani,  -. Il consenso informato come diritto umano internazionalmente protetto,  -. Considerazioni conclusive, .

Although the three international drug control treaties take a very broad approach to drug treatment, limitations do exist. These are limits of ethics and effectiveness, clarified and refined by human rights law. Thus, although States are not under any direct obligation to implement or prohibit specific treatment modalities, they do need to ensure, under both drug and human rights law, that the treatment options available to drug using individuals are first rights compliant and then effective.

Reaching this conclusion involved an analysis of human rights law related to drug treatment and constructive interpretation of the drug treatment articles in the three international drug control treaties. Many human rights standards, instruments and mechanisms are applicable to the topic of drug treatment. It is thus straightforward to identify State obligation, under human rights, as regards this topic. As expected, the human right to health is prominent, along with the rights of prisoners and children - particularly vulnerable groups in relation to drug treatment.

Although the drug conventions are broad when referring to treatment - to allow for future develop- ments in medicine, among other things - standards could be identified which limit the flexibility of States regarding drug treatment approaches.
In both cases, international human rights and international drug law, rights compliance and efficacy emerged as the most appropriate tests of State obligation regarding drug treatment. These tests should be applied to all currently implemented and potential drug treatment options, in order to ensure that obligations under both human rights and drug law are respected.

A test of rights compliance should be applied first to a drug treatment approach, followed by a test of efficacy. A drug treatment programme which is effective but not rights compliant is still not appropriate under the human rights and drug control regimes.

The practicality of these tests, and thus the usefulness of human rights in drug policy discussions, is further demonstrated via their successful application to opiate substitution therapy (OST) and compulsory treatment. OST is found to be both rights compliant end effective under these tests, and thus also under human rights law and the international drug conventions. Compulsory drug treatment is only rights compliant in very rare and temporary circumstances, but quasi-compulsory treatment (QCT) - for example, drug courts where individuals choose drug treatment as their only alternative to penal sanctions - is rights compliant in more cases. It was thus concluded that only when these specific, rights respecting criteria were met would QCT be appropriate. Following that assurance, the resulting drug treatment should be effective to justify the limitation of the individual’s rights through coercion.

It is widely held by legal scholars that the purpose of environmental rights is to protect individuals from environmental harms and improve the quality of the environment. However, thus far the focus of environmental rights has been placed exclusively on the natural environment. I break new ground in the literature on environmental rights by arguing that, in conjunction with international human rights regarding housing and public health, they should apply to the built environment as well. Through an analysis of relevant international laws and case law, and a review of scientific evidence, I demonstrate that protecting indoor environmental quality (IEQ) within buildings is necessary to the full realization of health, housing, and environmental rights. This argument has four important implications. First, it provides victims of indoor environmental harms with a new rights-based mechanism through which they may pursue the redressing of their grievances. Second, it makes a strong case for the inclusion of green building development in efforts to protect environmental rights throughout the world. Third, by directing policymakers to specific, measurable steps that can be taken to protect environmental rights, it eliminates the charge that such rights are too ambiguous to be successfully implemented. Finally, it leads to the establishment of a new legal device—a responsibility to adopt sustainable building practices.

At a time when South Africa's ailing and dysfunctional health system is on the verge of radical transformation through the mooted introduction of a National Health Insurance scheme, and when there are increasing political tensions between government and the courts, this book reflects upon the South African experience of judicially enforcing health-related constitutional rights. It attempts to understand the ways in which rights-based litigation has impacted on the operation and transformation of different features of the health system, including the formation and implementation of health laws and policies, processes of health resource allocation and rationing, the regulation of health care delivery in the private sector, and the promotion and protection of public health. (The book is also available to download, free of charge, from http://www.pulp.up.ac.za/monographs/can-rights-cure)

This paper tries to analyze the phenomenon of involuntary celibacy, also known as incels, and how it emerges to the center of society's attention. In doing so, it uses the analytical tool of "the right to health" and the concept of "political branding".

Luego de describir los importantes avances realizados por la Corte y la Comisión Interamericanas de Derechos Humanos en el ámbito de los derechos de las mujeres y de la igualdad de género, la autora procede a analizar las nuevas tendencias del Sistema Interamericano en relación al desarrollo de las distintas dimensiones de la autonomía a partir de dos sentencias recientes: el caso I.V. Vs. Bolivia sobre derechos sexuales y reproductivos, y el caso Teresa Yarce y otras Vs. Colombia sobre los
derechos de las mujeres defensoras de derechos humanos. A partir de estos asuntos analiza los componentes principales de la autonomía como
un principio y un derecho, por un lado, desde una perspectiva individual en relación con la toma de decisiones libres e informadas en el ámbito de la salud sexual y reproductiva, libre de violencia, discriminación y
estereotipos. Por otro lado, examina la autonomía como el derecho de las mujeres a decidir libremente en participar en procesos sociales, ocupar puestos de líderes y de trabajar colectivamente para superar las
desigualdades sociales y de género y, como correlato, el deber de los Estados de crear condiciones sociales y contextos seguros para que las mujeres puedan ejercer sus labores como defensoras. Finalmente, concluye que ambas decisiones reflejan una transición de la Corte Interamericana a un lenguaje más empoderador para las mujeres, que las percibe no sólo como víctimas de violencia y discriminación, sino también como agentes
de decisión, cambio e incidencia en su vida individual y social.

Everyday there are always chances and forum for us to discuss or be concerned about the matter of “health” or staying “healthy”, from private life to public issues, from domestic policies to global governance, because “health”, by definition or criteria, is highly related to personal dignity, lifestyle, and living conditions. Being the basis of everyone’s personal development, maintenance and protection of health has been long recognized as one of the fundamental human rights by international human rights law, in such forms of “the right to a standard of living adequate for the health” or “the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health” contained respectively within the UDHR and the ICESCR, and in fact, the WHO Constitution even manifests more that “The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition.”
Notwithstanding this undeniable importance, one question is frequently raised by international community, particularly by States when ratifying, or after ratifying, human rights treaties: as a human right, what does “health” indicate and entail upon States and other non-State actors in law? It is because “health” involving with too many complicated factors. Namely, despite recognitions of the existence and necessity of the right to health, but to ensure the right to health not to be infringed upon, or to be remedied when being violated, still depend on those questions of “what the substantial legal obligations are, how to comply with, and how to monitor and evaluate the situations of States’ compliance.” All of these questions have eventually been clarified in 2000 by CESCR’s No. 14 General Comment, which is referred to and based on by this study as well when interpreting the normative contents of the right to health.
Besides, this study also highlights the relationship between a government and people from the lens of public health. Looking closer upon the methodology and current development of public health, such as identification of social determinants of health and internationalization of health governance, it is found that “public health” has a dual sense, externally and internally, for States under international law; that is, not only public health affairs are definitely subject to the principles of jurisdictional exclusiveness and non-interference, but also they can be regarded as performances of health protection for people. This can be inferred by the interpretations of States’ “right to protect public health” and individuals’ “right to health care” provided separately in the preambular clause of the WHO-FCTC and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. As a result, this normative implication may serve as the rationale of the principles of “health promotion” and “health equity” in modern public health.
In the last part of this study, it applies the homogeneity and complementariy between the right to health and public health to answering the question of “whether and how the right to health can be implemented in national public health based on the nexus between the right to health and public health under international human rights law”. For instance, the requirements of priority setting and public participation contained within “the right to health” can be taken as the theoretical basis and strategic guidance of public health policies on one hand. On the other hand, the process, outcomes, and any investigations into people’s health by “public health” mechanisms may be used as factual evidence for the right to health indicators-benchmarks assessment, and this is also why the CESCR emphasizes that monitoring over satisfaction of the right to health should refer to the Alma Ata Declaration in 1978, the Program of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development in 1994, the health-related Millennium Development Goals in 2000 and so on.
At the final stage, this study would like to further elaborate upon the theory of “right to health-based public health”, which has been consistently advocated by human rights organizations and public health community, including the UN and all its specialized agencies, based on the inextricable nexus between the right to health and public health, such as the principles of non-discrimination, progressive realization and whichever central to safeguarding human dignity and social justice. Therefore, this study hopes to prove the necessity of its existence in theory and the feasibility of its application in practice, by demonstrating that the right to health can serve as the justification to legitimize public health measures on one hand, and public health may provide practicability to implement the right to health on the other hand, according to the theory of “right to health-based public health”.

Poor citizens in Singapore are increasingly squeezed by the high cost of healthcare. Ironically, Singapore is a developed country that is very popular with its medical tourism. On one hand many foreigners come to Singapore for the purpose of healthcare (medical assistance), but in other hand its poor citizens are facing the unreachable medical cost. This obviously a case of discrimination performed by the Singapore Government to its citizens, particularly related to the right to health that has been universally recognized under international law. This paper aims to analyze the existence of the right to health from the perspective of international human rights law. In addition, this writing is also intended to analyze the legal obligations and moral responsibilities of the Government of Singapore with regard to this issue.

The article aims to deepen the relationship between biolaw and European Union law, in order to understand what role the latter plays in the regulation of issues characterized by a high level of scientific and ethical complexity. Having identified a dual legal basis for the emergence of a European biolaw – the protection of the European common market (Article 114 TFEU) and the promotion of health (Article 168 TFEU) – the progressive emergence of an axiological, and not only procedural, dimension will be highlighted assuming the case-law of the Court of Justice as a common thread.

World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (the FCTC) was adopted on 21st May 2003 and came into force on 25 th February 2005. Since its adoption, Indonesia has never signed and ratified this Convention. Currently, Indonesia is the fifth largest tobacco market in the world and the third largest cigarrete consumer (WHO data in 2008), thus it is obligatory for Indonesia to obey the minimum standards of tobacco control under the FCTC. There are two problem formulations that will be answered by this writing: first, what are the obstacles faced by Indonesia during the ratification's plan of the FCTC? Second, how far the FCTC ratification is effective in protecting public health in Indonesia? This study is normative research by using statute and comparative approaches. Indonesian policy on tobacco control always face with obstacles in the area of politic, economic, and human rights side. Most of the laws are still abstract to support public health in general. Particular researches prove that ratification efforts done by Indonesia would not cause adverse impacts to the economic advantages of tobacco but yet would be able to give effective implementation and legal certainty to protect the public health.

Al conmemorarse cuarenta años de la realización de la Conferencia de Alma Ata, reunión organizada por OMS y UNICEF entre el 6 y 12 de septiembre de 1978, se presenta esta obra que realza la trascendencia que ha tenido esta política pública para los sistemas de salud de sus países miembros. Durante este encuentro se sentaron las bases de lo que hoy conocemos como Atención Primaria de la Salud (APS): asistencia sanitaria básica; promoción y rehabilitación en salud; base científica de las acciones; participación de la comunidad en la planificación de la salud; APS como núcleo del sistema de salud y pilar del desarrollo social y económico.

The Philippine government's COVID-19 response has been reactive, ad hoc and inadequate. While quarantine and social distancing measures may have slowed down the spread of new cases of SARS-CoV2 infections, the government has been slow to scale up the capacity of the healthcare system to test, trace and treat COVID-19 patients as well as attend to the non-COVID related health needs of the population. The gaps and failings in the government's COVID-19 response can not merely be attributed to poor leadership or the lack of experience in dealing with a pandemic of this scale. From the onset, the Philippine's pandemic response has been fundamentally constrained by the sorry state of the public health system in the country. This weak public health system is the result of deliberate policy choices, fiscal priorities and institutional design made over many years up to the present. As the country and the rest of the world move slowly and cautiously towards a "new normal," it is essential to remedy the fundamental ills of the Philippine health system beyond the requisites of dealing with emergency situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic. We need an inclusive, just and equitable health system that will help us look forward to a "new and better normal" for all.

La hipótesis de este trabajo es que el sistema internacional de patentes farmacéuticas, con su diseño actual, dificulta el acceso a ciertos medicamentos en distintas partes del mundo. Sin embargo, no es la mera existencia de patentes la que opera como una barrera al acceso a medicamentos, sino más bien las prácticas jurídicas y económicas que la arquitectura del sistema de patentes habilita.
Para demostrar esta hipótesis dividí el trabajo en dos partes. En la primera parte, presento un panorama general del estado de situación del acceso a los medicamentos y señalo cómo el derecho a acceder a los medicamentos forma parte del derecho más general a la salud. Allí muestro cómo si bien las patentes no son la principal barrera en el acceso a todas las clases de medicamentos, en algunos casos se constituye como un obstáculo para muchas personas que los necesitan.
En la segunda parte, presento los rasgos que caracterizan la protección de los productos y procesos farmacéuticos en la actualidad, delineo las principales circunstancias que favorecieron la instauración de un sistema internacional de patentes que aspira a la homogeneidad y analizo un conjunto de prácticas jurídicas y comerciales llevadas a cabo por la industria farmacéutica multinacional y los gobiernos de los países en desarrollo con el fin de situar los estándares de protección de la propiedad intelectual en los niveles que esos países poseen. Allí muestro cómo estas circunstancias, acuerdos y prácticas, en conjunto, dificultan o impiden el acceso a los medicamentos.
Finalmente, presento unas conclusiones.

The legal recognition of the right to health worldwide has never been so advanced. At least 115 constitutions around the world have entrenched the right to health or health care, whether as justiciable claim-rights, aspirational guarantees, or a combination of the two. For advocates of the right to health, the path is open to create health systems that are more rights-respecting and more just. Yet others argue that its entrenchment leads to an expansion of judicial power and the introduction of incommensurable individual and curative claims in a necessarily utilitarian policy area. We suggest two questions to unlock this debate. First, what are the effects of justiciability on a healthcare system? Second, how do matters of institutional design change those effects?

In this Article, we examine these questions by comparing the constitutional right to health in Colombia and South Africa across two decades. In Colombia, the right to health has grounded an elaborate structure of tutela-based litigation and a new consciousness of health entitlement. In South Africa, the right to health has supported limited judicial interventions for particular health outcomes only. In particular, we note how four variables: doctrine, judicial roles, private financing arrangements, and civil society lead to different version of what we characterize as “high-intensity” or “low-intensity” justiciability in the two jurisdictions.

Far from leading inexorably to the expansion of judicial power, and to litigious, individualistic, and curative biases in health systems, the entrenchment of a justiciable right to health can instead produce only minimal litigation, private negotiations in the shadow of litigation, and civil society pressure for legal change. This contingency is revealed by close qualitative comparison. With Julieta Lemaitre

The work starts from the constitutional regulation of the right to health protection and analyzes the jurisprudential development around it by the Constitutional Court during these forty years. It explains that the right to health protection is regulated as a guiding principle, and not as a fundamental right. However, the health protection requires the recognition of fundamental rights and not only of guiding principles. One sector of Spanish scientific doctrine considers that for this reason a right to health should be constitutionally recognized as distinct from the guiding principle of health protection. Our Constitutional Court, up to now, has protected those aspects that imply fundamental rights establishing the connection between the right to the protection of health
and fundamental rights protected by the amparo appeal before the Constitutional Court as the right to life, the right to privacy or the right to effective judicial protection.

This paper will deal with the link between sports and human rights. Its aim is to demonstrate, in a pedagogical way, how human rights based approaches can be used for advancing grassroots sports and physical activities. Incidentally it will deal with how sports can be used and are being used to implement and strengthen human rights.

The paper will be carried out in three parts. The first part will briefly define human rights based approach and give an overview of its main elements and principles. It will also enumerate some of the relevant aspects of the adoption of a human rights based approach to grassroots sports and physical activities.

The second part will compile international human rights legislation that assures the right to sports and it will also deal with the application of the international human rights law system to sports.

The third part will set some examples of rights that sports and physical activities should be and/or are already being used as a tool for implementation.

In Centre for Health Human Rights & Development and 3 Others v Attorney General (CEHURD) (2011), the petitioner questioned the constitutionality of the Ugandan government’s failure to provide basic maternal health services in the context of the right to health. While the Constitutional Court qualified the use of the ‘political question doctrine’ (PQD) in the CEHURD case, the Supreme Court indicated why the doctrine cannot be used. The case is thus back at the Constitutional Court for consideration of the constitutionality of the right to health, yet there is no clear test that follows the application of the PQD. Scholars disagree about the scope of the PQD. Some contend that it does not apply to human rights violations and that any attempt to do so is a judicial intrusion into the realm of the executive or legislature (ISER 2012; Dennison 2014). Others argue that the PQD’s applicability depends on which organ of government is best suited to offer a viable solution to a problem, or that it comes into effect where a court is ill-equipped to deal with the matter before it (Juma & Okpaluba 2012).