斯洛伐克和芬兰的《烟草控制框架公约》：一部法律，两种不同做法？
The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in Slovakia and in Finland: one law, two different practices?
作者信息
Pavlikova Barbara, van Dijk Jitse P
机构信息
Department of Labor Law and Social Security Law, Faculty of Law, Comenius University, Šafárikovo námestie č. 6, P. O. BOX 313, 810 00, Bratislava, Slovak Republic.
Department of Community and Occupational Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
出版信息
BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2020 Sep 29;20(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s12914-020-00243-x.
BACKGROUND
The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) was ratified in 2004 in Slovakia and in 2005 in Finland. The aim of this study was to compare the implementation of the FCTC in the national laws and policies regarding smoking in Finland and Slovakia.
METHODS
In this case study the following areas are compared: the legal framework; the monitoring system and health promotion; treatment; and policies aimed at reducing tobacco consumption. We report on these in this order after a short historical introduction.
RESULTS
The legal frameworks are similar in Slovakia and in Finland. Finland far exceeds the minimum legal requirements. Slovakian regulations reflect the FCTC requirements; however, social tolerance is very high. In Finland the monitoring system and health promotion are aimed more at tobacco consumption. Slovakia does not follow the surveillance plans recommended by WHO so strictly; often there are no current data available. No additional documents regarding the FCTC have been adopted in Slovakia. The financial contribution to treatment is very low. Slovakian tobacco control policy is more focused on repression than on prevention, in contrast to Finland. Smoking bans meet European standards. Excise duties rise regularly in both countries.
CONCLUSION
Implementation of the FCTC is at different levels in the compared countries. Finland has a clear plan for achieving the goal of a smoking-free country. Slovakia meets only the minimum standard required for fulfillment of its international obligations. Its policy should become more transparent by making more up-to-date data available.
背景
《烟草控制框架公约》（FCTC）于2004年在斯洛伐克批准，2005年在芬兰批准。本研究的目的是比较芬兰和斯洛伐克在国家法律和政策中关于吸烟的《烟草控制框架公约》实施情况。
方法
在本案例研究中，对以下领域进行了比较：法律框架；监测系统与健康促进；治疗；以及旨在减少烟草消费的政策。在简短的历史介绍之后，我们按此顺序报告这些内容。
结果
斯洛伐克和芬兰的法律框架相似。芬兰远远超出了最低法律要求。斯洛伐克的法规反映了《烟草控制框架公约》的要求；然而，社会容忍度非常高。在芬兰，监测系统和健康促进更多地针对烟草消费。斯洛伐克没有如此严格地遵循世界卫生组织建议的监测计划；通常没有当前可用的数据。斯洛伐克没有通过关于《烟草控制框架公约》的其他文件。对治疗的财政贡献非常低。与芬兰相比，斯洛伐克的烟草控制政策更侧重于压制而非预防。吸烟禁令符合欧洲标准。两国的消费税都定期上涨。
结论
在被比较的国家中，《烟草控制框架公约》的实施处于不同水平。芬兰有一个实现无烟国家目标的明确计划。斯洛伐克仅达到履行其国际义务所需的最低标准。其政策应通过提供更多最新数据而变得更加透明。
Zotero 插件