Infectious Diseases Institute, Makerere University, P.O. Box 22418, Kampala, Uganda.
Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, P.O Box 7183, Kampala, Uganda.
BMC Public Health. 2023 Apr 25;23(1):761. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15555-5.
Despite the discovery of vaccines, the control, and prevention of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) relied on non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). This article describes the development and application of the Public Health Act to implement NPIs for COVID-19 pandemic control in Uganda.
This is a case study of Uganda's experience with enacting COVID-19 Rules under the Public Health Act Cap. 281. The study assessed how and what Rules were developed, their influence on the outbreak progress, and litigation. The data sources reviewed were applicable laws and policies, Presidential speeches, Cabinet resolutions, statutory instruments, COVID-19 situation reports, and the registry of court cases that contributed to a triangulated analysis.
Uganda applied four COVID-19 broad Rules for the period March 2020 to October 2021. The Minister of Health enacted the Rules, which response teams, enforcement agencies, and the general population followed. The Presidential speeches, their expiry period and progress of the pandemic curve led to amendment of the Rules twenty one (21) times. The Uganda Peoples Defense Forces Act No. 7 of 2005, the Public Finance Management Act No. 3 of 2015, and the National Policy for Disaster Preparedness and Management supplemented the enacted COVID-19 Rules. However, these Rules attracted specific litigation due to perceived infringement on certain human rights provisions.
Countries can enact supportive legislation within the course of an outbreak. The balance of enforcing public health interventions and human rights infringements is an important consideration in future. We recommend public sensitization about legislative provisions and reforms to guide public health responses in future outbreaks or pandemics.
尽管已经发现了疫苗，但 2019 年冠状病毒病（COVID-19）的控制和预防仍依赖于非药物干预（NPIs）。本文描述了乌干达为控制 COVID-19 大流行而利用《公共卫生法》实施 NPIs 的情况。
这是乌干达利用《公共卫生法》第 281 章颁布 COVID-19 法规的案例研究。该研究评估了如何制定和制定哪些规则，它们对疫情发展的影响以及诉讼情况。审查的数据源包括适用的法律和政策、总统演讲、内阁决议、法定文书、COVID-19 情况报告以及有助于三角分析的法庭案件登记处。
乌干达在 2020 年 3 月至 2021 年 10 月期间适用了四项 COVID-19 广泛规则。卫生部长颁布了这些规则，应对小组、执法机构和广大民众都遵守了这些规则。总统演讲及其到期日以及大流行曲线的进展导致对这些规则进行了 21 次修订。2005 年第 7 号《乌干达人民国防军法》、2015 年第 3 号《公共财政管理法》和《国家备灾和管理政策》补充了颁布的 COVID-19 规则。然而，由于这些规则被认为侵犯了某些人权规定，因此引起了具体的诉讼。
在疫情爆发期间，各国可以颁布支持性立法。在未来，平衡执行公共卫生干预措施和侵犯人权之间的关系是一个重要的考虑因素。我们建议公众了解立法规定和改革，以指导未来疫情或大流行期间的公共卫生应对。
