• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
The United Kingdom's Coronavirus Act, deprivations of liberty, and the right to liberty and security of the person.英国的《冠状病毒法案》、人身自由的剥夺以及人身自由和安全权。
J Law Biosci. 2020 Apr 29;7(1):lsaa011. doi: 10.1093/jlb/lsaa011. eCollection 2020 Jan-Jun.
2
The right to liberty of persons with psychosocial disabilities at the United Nations: A tale of two interpretations.联合国中具有心理社会残疾人士的自由权利:两种解释的故事。
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2019 Sep-Oct;66:101497. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2019.101497. Epub 2019 Oct 18.
3
Baby doe redux? The Department of Health and Human Services and the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002: a cautionary note on normative neonatal practice.“婴儿多伊”事件重演?美国卫生与公众服务部及2002年《出生时存活婴儿保护法》:关于规范新生儿医疗行为的警示
Pediatrics. 2005 Oct;116(4):e576-85. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-1590.
4
European standards of respect for human rights in the application of compulsory medical measures in criminal proceedings.刑事诉讼中适用强制性医疗措施时尊重人权的欧洲标准。
Wiad Lek. 2019;72(12 cz 2):2445-2450.
5
Deprivation of liberty and intensive care: an update post Ferreira.自由剥夺与重症监护:费雷拉之后的最新情况
J Intensive Care Soc. 2018 Feb;19(1):35-42. doi: 10.1177/1751143717730677. Epub 2017 Sep 5.
6
Legal protection in psychiatry. The jurisprudence of the organs of the European convention of human rights.精神病学中的法律保护。欧洲人权公约机构的判例法。
Eur Psychiatry. 1998;13 Suppl 3:101s-6s. doi: 10.1016/S0924-9338(98)80040-0.
7
Judicial Review of Public Health Powers Since the Start of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Trends and Implications.COVID-19 大流行以来对公共卫生权力的司法审查:趋势与影响。
Am J Public Health. 2023 Mar;113(3):280-287. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2022.307181. Epub 2023 Jan 19.
8
Is state power to protect health compatible with substantive due process rights?国家保护健康的权力是否与实质性正当程序权利相符?
Ann Health Law. 2011 Winter;20(1):113-49, 7 p preceding 1.
9
Public health law in a new century: part II: public health powers and limits.新世纪的公共卫生法:第二部分:公共卫生权力与限制
JAMA. 2000 Jun 14;283(22):2979-84. doi: 10.1001/jama.283.22.2979.
10
Psychedelics and cognitive liberty: Reimagining drug policy through the prism of human rights.迷幻药与认知自由:通过人权视角重新构想毒品政策。
Int J Drug Policy. 2016 Mar;29:80-7. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.12.025. Epub 2016 Jan 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Secondary School Students' Reasoning About Science and Personhood.中学生对科学与人格的推理
Sci Educ (Dordr). 2021;30(4):967-991. doi: 10.1007/s11191-021-00199-x. Epub 2021 Apr 13.

英国的《冠状病毒法案》、人身自由的剥夺以及人身自由和安全权。

The United Kingdom's Coronavirus Act, deprivations of liberty, and the right to liberty and security of the person.

作者信息

Pugh Jonathan

机构信息

The Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Oxford OX1 1PT, UK.

出版信息

J Law Biosci. 2020 Apr 29;7(1):lsaa011. doi: 10.1093/jlb/lsaa011. eCollection 2020 Jan-Jun.

DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsaa011
PMID:32728458
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7197562/
Abstract

In response to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic the UK government has passed the Coronavirus Act 2020 (CA). Among other things, this act extends existing statutory powers to impose restrictions of liberty for public health purposes. The extension of such powers naturally raises concerns about whether their use will be compatible with human rights law. In particular, it is unclear whether their use will fall within the public heath exception to the Article 5 right to liberty and security of the person in the European Convention of Human Rights. In this paper, I outline key features of the CA, and briefly consider how the European Court of Human Rights has interpreted the public health exception to Article 5 rights. This analysis suggests two grounds on which restrictions of liberty enforced some under the CA might be vulnerable to claims of Article 5 rights violations. First, the absence of specified time limits on certain restrictions of liberty means that they may fail the requirement of legal certainty championed by the European Court in its interpretation of the public health exception. Second, the Coronavirus Act's extension of powers to individuals lacking public health expertise may undermine the extent to which the act will ensure that deprivations of liberty are necessary and proportionate.

摘要

为应对严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)引发的大流行,英国政府通过了《2020年冠状病毒法案》(CA)。该法案除其他事项外,还扩大了现有的法定权力,以便出于公共卫生目的对自由施加限制。此类权力的扩大自然引发了人们对其使用是否符合人权法的担忧。特别是,尚不清楚其使用是否属于《欧洲人权公约》中关于人身自由和安全的第5条权利的公共卫生例外情况。在本文中,我概述了《2020年冠状病毒法案》的主要特点,并简要探讨了欧洲人权法院如何解释第5条权利的公共卫生例外情况。这一分析表明,根据《2020年冠状病毒法案》实施的某些限制自由的措施可能因侵犯第5条权利而面临质疑,原因有两点。第一,对某些自由限制未规定具体时限,这意味着它们可能不符合欧洲人权法院在解释公共卫生例外情况时所倡导的法律确定性要求。第二,《2020年冠状病毒法案》将权力扩大至缺乏公共卫生专业知识的个人,这可能会削弱该法案确保剥夺自由具有必要性和相称性的程度。