scholarly journals Crisis Without Borders: What Does International Law Say About Border Closure in the Context of Covid-19?

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Chetail
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Vast Number ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
International Human

This paper is assessing the legality of border closures decided by a vast number of countries with the view of limiting the spread of Covid-19. Although this issue has raised diverging interpretations in relation to International Health Regulations and regional free movement agreements, international human rights law provides a clear-cut answer: the rule of law stops neither at the border nor in times of emergency. Against this normative framework, border control can and must be carried out with the twofold purpose of protecting public health and individual rights, whereas border closure is unable to do so because it is by essence a collective and automatic denial of admission without any other form of process. This paper argues that blanket entry bans on the ground of public health are illegal under international human rights law. They cannot be reconciled with the most basic rights of migrants and refugees, including the principle of non-refoulement and access to asylum procedures, the prohibition of collective expulsion, the best interests of the child and the principle of non-discrimination. The paper concludes on the ways to better integrate at the borders public health and human rights imperatives in due respect with the rule of law. In both law and practice, public health and migrant's rights are not mutually exclusive. They can reinforce each other within a comprehensive human rights based approach to health and migration policies.

International Humanitarian Law

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aryeh Neier
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Ancient Times ◽  
International Human

This chapter explores how international humanitarian law and international human rights law initially developed independently, but have converged and are now deeply interwoven. Since ancient times, some who take part in armed combat have recognized that placing certain limits on the way in which they conduct hostilities can be advantageous. It can be a sign of civilized behavior, enhancing their own prestige; it may be a way to encourage their opponents to behave in a similar manner; and it may contribute to the reestablishment of peaceful relations in which the rule of law prevails. Whether or not these limits confer advantages, they do most often have the effect of asserting a commitment to humane principles.

scholarly journals Breastfeeding in Refugee Camps: A Child and Maternal Right?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleisha Ebrahimi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Refugee Camps ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Right ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Formula Milk ◽  
International Human ◽  
Milk Marketing

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.

s.Two Implementation and Accountability, 7 Monitoring and Review to Assess Human Rights Implementation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meier Benjamin Mason ◽  
Huffstetler Hanna ◽  
Bueno de Mesquita Judith
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Public Health Data ◽  
Health Related ◽  
International Human ◽  
Public Health Promotion ◽  
National Practice

This chapter analyzes the fundamental importance of monitoring and review procedures to assess the implementation of human rights to advance public health. Recognizing monitoring and review as central to human rights accountability, the evolving functions of human rights monitoring highlight the range of national, regional, and international review mechanisms that provide oversight to support the realization of health-related human rights. While these mechanisms often do not have judicial powers—their recommendations are advisory rather than legally binding—the interpretive role entrusted to these review procedures has endowed their health-related recommendations with legitimacy in clarifying human rights treaty provisions and reviewing state efforts to meet treaty obligations. Assessing the implementation of international human rights law through national practice, monitoring institutions can facilitate human rights accountability for public health promotion and operationalize public health data to press governments to implement rights.

Monitoring and Review to Assess Human Rights Implementation

2020 ◽  
pp. 155-176
Author(s):  
Benjamin Mason Meier ◽  
Hanna Huffstetler ◽  
Judith Bueno de Mesquita
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Public Health Data ◽  
Health Related ◽  
International Human ◽  
Public Health Promotion ◽  
National Practice

This chapter analyzes the fundamental importance of monitoring and review procedures to assess the implementation of human rights to advance public health. Recognizing monitoring and review as central to human rights accountability, the evolving functions of human rights monitoring highlight the range of national, regional, and international review mechanisms that provide oversight to support the realization of health-related human rights. While these mechanisms often do not have judicial powers—their recommendations are advisory rather than legally binding—the interpretive role entrusted to these review procedures has endowed their health-related recommendations with legitimacy in clarifying human rights treaty provisions and reviewing state efforts to meet treaty obligations. Assessing the implementation of international human rights law through national practice, monitoring institutions can facilitate human rights accountability for public health promotion and operationalize public health data to press governments to implement rights.

scholarly journals 20.A. Round table: COVID-19, infectious diseases, and human rights and risks in public health

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
International Human ◽  
Human Rights Based Approach

Abstract The 21st century has been marked by trans-national epidemics of SARs, MERS, Ebola and most recently COVID-19. In spite of WHO advice to the contrary, some States have responded by closing their borders to persons travelling from certain countries. International human rights law permits restrictions of movement to protect public health, subject to strict tests of necessity and proportionality. To a potentially unprecedented degree, however, the spread of COVID-19 has brought to the fore the use of social distancing measures, and a surge in demand for health care, both of which raise significant questions of equity given disparities in wealth and income within and across populations. This panel discussion will explore how a human rights-based approach supports evidence-based responses to epidemics of infectious diseases, and why a human rights-based response may be more effective than other measures in addressing these global threats. Issues covered will include: Advantages and possible limitations of a human rights-based approach to infectious epidemics.Emerging questions of human rights, distributive justice, regulatory authority and efficacy associated with sustained social distancing measures and the management of health care access in a time of surging demand.Early evidence of the health and social impact of legal responses to COVID-19. Key messages States have both obligations and limitations under international human rights law in preventing and responding to infectious epidemics. The large-scale application of social distancing approaches can create acute pressure on poorer people and poses legal, moral and practical questions about the social burdens of disease control.

COVID-19, International Human Rights Law and the State-Corporate Complex

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-213
Author(s):  
Jolyon Ford
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Data Gathering ◽  
The State ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human

Abstract Data-driven technologies (such as mobile phone-based tracing apps) have been at the forefront of public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, we have also seen high-level expressions of concern about how state actions ostensibly in pursuit of public health goals have in fact greatly accelerated existing human rights concerns about newer technologies, especially increased state and corporate surveillance. This article explores issues at the nexus of COVID-19 public health responses, civil-political rights under international human rights law, and the responsible governance of data-driven technologies. In particular, it offers a framework to evaluate the human rights compatibility of tech-assisted COVID-related state measures. The articles also explore analogies between COVID-related measures and post-2001 counter-terrorism actions taken by states in the name of public security. It cautions against exceptional measures becoming hardwired in ways that may unreasonably impact on pre-COVID freedoms. The article argues that the blurring of state and corporate surveillance and data-gathering and the often symbiotic relationship between tech firms and governments (the ‘state-corporate complex’) complicate efforts to assert clear frames of responsibility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document