Department of Community Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Department of Community Support Social Justice and Inclusion, UNAIDS, Geneva, Switzerland.
BMJ Glob Health. 2022 Feb;7(2). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-008232.
In the early years of the HIV epidemic, many countries passed laws criminalising HIV non-disclosure, exposure and/or transmission. These responses, intended to limit transmission and punish those viewed as 'irresponsible', have since been found to undermine effective HIV responses by driving people away from diagnosis and increasing stigma towards those living with HIV. With the emergence of COVID-19, human rights and public health advocates raised concerns that countries might again respond with criminal and punitive approaches. To assess the degree to which countries adopted such strategies, 51 English-language emergency orders from 39 countries, representing seven world regions, were selected from the COVID-19 Law Lab, a database of COVID-19 related laws from over 190 countries. Emergency orders were reviewed to assess the type of restrictions identified, enforcement mechanisms and compliance with principles outlined in the Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including legality, legitimate aim, proportionality, non-discrimination, limited duration and subject to review. Approximately half of all orders examined included criminal sanctions related to violations of lockdowns. Few orders fully complied with the legal requirements for the limitation of, or derogation from, human rights obligations in public health emergencies. In future pandemics, policymakers should carefully assess the need for criminal and punitive responses and ensure that emergency orders comply with countries' human rights obligations.
在艾滋病病毒流行的早期，许多国家通过了将艾滋病病毒不披露、暴露和/或传播定为刑事犯罪的法律。这些旨在限制传播和惩罚被视为“不负责任”的人的反应，后来被发现破坏了有效的艾滋病病毒应对措施，因为这些反应迫使人们避免诊断，并增加了对艾滋病病毒感染者的污名化。随着 COVID-19 的出现，人权和公共卫生倡导者担心各国可能再次采取刑事和惩罚性的方法来应对。为了评估各国采取这种策略的程度，从 COVID-19 法律实验室中选择了来自 39 个国家的 7 个世界区域的 51 份英语紧急命令，该实验室是一个来自 190 多个国家的 COVID-19 相关法律数据库。审查了紧急命令，以评估所确定的限制类型、执法机制以及遵守《公民权利和政治权利国际公约关于限制和克减条款的锡拉库萨原则》中概述的原则的情况，这些原则包括合法性、正当目的、相称性、非歧视、有限期限和接受审查。审查的大约一半命令都包括与违反封锁有关的刑事制裁。很少有命令完全符合在公共卫生紧急情况下限制或克减人权义务的法律要求。在未来的大流行病中，政策制定者应仔细评估是否需要采取刑事和惩罚性应对措施，并确保紧急命令符合各国的人权义务。
