Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Toronto, Ontario M5T 3M7, Canada.
BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2013 Dec 1;13:48. doi: 10.1186/1472-698X-13-48.
Global health institutions increasingly recognize that the right to health should guide the formulation of replacement goals for the Millennium Development Goals, which expire in 2015. However, the right to health's contribution is undercut by the principle of progressive realization, which links provision of health services to available resources, permitting states to deny even basic levels of health coverage domestically and allowing international assistance for health to remain entirely discretionary.
To prevent progressive realization from undermining both domestic and international responsibilities towards health, international human rights law institutions developed the idea of non-derogable "minimum core" obligations to provide essential health services. While minimum core obligations have enjoyed some uptake in human rights practice and scholarship, their definition in international law fails to specify which health services should fall within their scope, or to specify wealthy country obligations to assist poorer countries. These definitional gaps undercut the capacity of minimum core obligations to protect essential health needs against inaction, austerity and illegitimate trade-offs in both domestic and global action. If the right to health is to effectively advance essential global health needs in these contexts, weaknesses within the minimum core concept must be resolved through innovative research on social, political and legal conceptualizations of essential health needs.
We believe that if the minimum core concept is strengthened in these ways, it will produce a more feasible and grounded conception of legally prioritized health needs that could assist in advancing health equity, including by providing a framework rooted in legal obligations to guide the formulation of new health development goals, providing a baseline of essential health services to be protected as a matter of right against governmental claims of scarcity and inadequate international assistance, and empowering civil society to claim fulfillment of their essential health needs from domestic and global decision-makers.
全球卫生机构越来越认识到,健康权应指导千年发展目标替代目标的制定,千年发展目标将于 2015 年到期。然而,健康权的贡献受到逐步实现原则的削弱,该原则将卫生服务的提供与可用资源联系起来,允许国家在国内拒绝提供甚至是基本的卫生保健,也允许国际卫生援助仍然完全由各国自行决定。
为防止逐步实现原则破坏各国在国内和国际上对健康应承担的责任,国际人权法机构提出了提供基本卫生服务的不可减损的“核心最低义务”概念。虽然核心最低义务在人权实践和学术研究中得到了一定程度的采纳,但国际法对其定义未能具体说明哪些卫生服务应属于其范围,也未能具体说明富裕国家援助贫穷国家的义务。这些定义上的差距削弱了核心最低义务在保护基本卫生需求方面的能力,使其无法应对国内和全球行动中的不作为、紧缩措施和不合理的权衡。如果健康权要在这些情况下有效地促进基本的全球卫生需求,就必须通过对基本卫生需求的社会、政治和法律概念进行创新性研究,来解决核心最低义务概念中的弱点。
我们认为,如果以这些方式加强核心最低义务概念,将产生一个更可行和更有基础的法律优先卫生需求概念,这将有助于促进卫生公平,包括提供一个基于法律义务的框架,以指导新的卫生发展目标的制定,将基本卫生服务作为一项权利加以保护,免受政府对资源短缺和国际援助不足的主张,并赋予民间社会权力,使其能够向国内和全球决策者要求实现其基本卫生需求。