Американский Научный Журнал INTERNATIONAL LEGAL REGULATION OF THE RIGHT TO HUMAN HEALTH (41-47)

In recent years, significant changes have taken place in international law with regard to the normative definition of the right to health, which includes both the protection of health and the state of health. These norms suggest that the right to health care be considered in the following specific structure, which raises a number of important issues such as inequality of treatment for receiving medical care, the quality of medical care, which is also intertwined with the concept of social justice and, naturally, the right to an attainable level of physical and mental health. Need to agree that the Republic of Kazakhstan, like other states at the moment of its development, is involved in globalization processes that affect the implementation of socioeconomic policies, and this trend will continue. The governments of many states, of course, are forced to reckon with promising structural problems, changes in the internal and external conditions of development. And this objectively dictates the need to modernize social strategy. At the same time, it is typical for developed countries that, despite strong economic and political pressure, the updating of the paradigm of social development and social policy is taking place consistently and gradually, taking into account previous achievements and traditions, on the basis of politically productive and responsible principles of social balance and dialogue. All that is needed for new models is a combination of the principles of economic efficiency and social justice Скачать в формате PDF
American Scientific Journal № ( 41) / 2020 41

ЮРИД ИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL REGULATION OF THE RIGHT TO HUMAN HEALTH

Alieva I. Zh .
PhD student of Karaganda state University.
Academician E. A. Buketov
Bazarova G.S.
Senior Lecturer,
Eurasian Humanitarian Institute

Keywords: health, security, ri ght, international law, regulation, Control in international law, implementation

Introduction
In recent years, significant changes have taken
place in international law with regard to the normative
definition of the right to health, which includes both the
protection of health and the state of health. These norms
suggest that the right to health ca re be considered in the
following specific structure, which raises a number of
important issues such as inequality of treatment for
receiving medical care, the quality of medical care,
which is also intertwined with the concept of social
justice and, natur ally, the right to an attainable level of
physical and mental health. Need to agree that the
Republic of Kazakhstan, like other states at the moment
of its dev elopment, is involved in globalization
processes that affect the implementation of socio -
economic policies, and this trend will continue. The
governments of many states, of course, are forced to
reckon with promising structural problems, changes in
the int ernal and external conditions of development.
And this objectively dictates the need to modernize
social strategy. At the same time, it is typical for
developed countries that, despite strong economic and
political pressure, the updating of the paradigm of
social development and social policy is taking place
consistently and gradually, taking into acc ount
previous achievements and traditions, on the basis of
politically productive and responsible principles of
social balance and dialogue. All that is needed for new
models is a combination of the principles of economic
efficiency and social justice
[1]. Thi s article examines the legal nature of the
right to health protection and the features of this right
in international legal acts. The specifics of the right to
health protection, mechanisms for ensuring it, the
Treaty obligations of States parties in the f ramework of
accession to international instruments, and issues of
monitoring the performance of obligations are
illustrated in this article.
Methods and mater ials
The study used logical and legal, systemic,
structural, historical, as well as special lega l methods
for interpreting legal norms.
Results
The main strategic tasks of the Republic of
Kazakhstan and the priorities of the development of our
society a re the systematic and qualitative improvement
of the human standard of livin g, the phased
development of the social sphere. At the same time, the
implementation of the main directions of state policy in
the social sphere should be carried out on the basis of a
scientifically reasoned constitutional and legal concept
of social stat ehood.
In modern conditions, the Republic of Kazakhstan
has formed a rather progressive regulatory framework
for the protection of the right to health, which have been
formed tak ing into account international human rights
standards. At this stage of its d evelopment, the
Republic of Kazakhstan is an active member of the
international community, which imposes certain
obligations to comply with international standards in
the field of health care. At a time when the basic
standards of the right to health care in the world are
rapidly developing in accordance with international
law, its regulatory clarification in national law is of
important conceptual and practical importance for the
formation of state policy in the field of health, which
determines the releva nce of research in the field of
influence and implementation of international norms in
the national legislation of the states and the obligations
of the state arising in connectio n with this to ensure this
right. In the framework of the study, internationa l legal
acts regulating the right to health protection were
analyzed (the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights,) the WHO Con stitution and other international
legal documents.
Discussion
The problems of the right to health and
compliance with international obligations to ensure and
protect the right to health were mainly considered in the
context of the protection of social huma n rights, which
influenced the conduct of holistic research in this area.
The issues of protecting civil rights, primarily in the
framework of the constitutional and legal aspect in the
Republic of Kazakhstan, were carried out in the
dissertation of A.N. S agindykova back in 1999, during
which the main problems that existed at that time in the
Republic of Kazakhstan were raised. It should be noted
that some of the issues raised in this dissertation, such
as the right of citizens to environmental, sanitary an d
epidemiological well -being and radiation safety, the
right of citizens in t he field of medical insurance, the
right of citizens to information about their health status
and factors affecting health, still have a place to be
relevant in the Republic of Ka zakhstan. Questions
concerning the unification of national legislation with
international standards in the field of social rights and
specifically in the field of the right to health protection

42 American Scientific Journal № ( 41) / 2020
were not the objects of integral scientific research of
Kazakh scientists.
On this issue, the research of Russian scientists,
who highligh t this legal problem as one of the most
pressing issues of our time, deserves attention. Thus, A.
L. Vorontsov and E. V. Vorontsova in their scientific
research «distinguish inter national legal cooperation as
an independent mechanism for implementing the r ight
to health protection, aimed primarily at ensuring the
positive obligations of States that they have assumed as
obligations under international agreements»[2]. Also
noteworthy from the research is the author's abstract of
Barteneva D. G. devoted to the issues of regulation of
the right to health protection by the norms of
international law. Particular attention is paid to non -
judicial international mechanisms for protecting th e
right to health care [3]. Based on the research of other
scientists, Paschenko deduces the issues of
implementing the human right to health protection and
medical care from the category of personal problems to
the category of problems of the state and ci vil
society[4].
According to international law, the «right to health
protection» is considered more broadly than in the
constitutional norms or specialized legislation of the
state. As already noted, the right to health protection is
closely intertwined w ith the concept of a decent
standard of living, link ing the right to health protection
with social policies implemented at the level of the
national state. This provision allows the right to health
protection to be considered together with social
relations and distinguishes this category of right from a
pur ely biological category to a broader one, which is
related to the implementation of the social function of
the state. The first concept of the right to health in
accordance with international law was reco gnized in
the universal Declaration of human rights of 1948
(hereinafter - the Declaration), which was unanimously
proclaimed by the UN General Assembly as a common
standard for all mankind. The Declaration enshrines the
right to «a standard of living suff icient for the health
and well -being of himself and his family, including
medical care, etc., the right to safety in case of illness,
disability, or lack of livelihood in circumstances
beyond control from him»[5]. As we can see, the
Declaration does not de fine the right to health
separately - as a necessary component of human rights,
but rather highlights as a standard of human rights the
standard of living necessary for health and the
possibility of receiving medical care. These two
concepts in their seman tic content go beyond the scope
of medical care. Acc ording to their legal properties, the
norms of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
while not being legally enforceable, but nevertheless
led to a universal understanding of human rights. Based
on i nternational acts, we can say that violation or
insu fficient attention to human rights can seriously
affect human health (inhumane degrading person, cruel
treatment, violence, torture, poor living conditions, lack
of information, lack of medical services).
• Respect, protection and observance of human
rights can reduce the vulnerability and impact of ill
health (health, nutrition, standard of living and
education, adequate environmental and working
conditions).
• The health system can promote or violate
human rights in the form in which it is designed an d
implemented (access to services, provision of
information, respect for the integrity and privacy,
cultural sensitivity, gender and age sensitivity).
In international law, the right to health is reflected
for the first time as a separate category of righ ts in the
Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights
(ICESCR) Article 12 of the ICESCR clearly establishes
the right to health and defines the steps that States must
take to «progressively realize» the «m aximum
available resources» of the «highest at tainable standard
of health», including «reducing stillbirth and infant
mortality and for the healthy development of the child»;
«Improving all aspects of environmental and industrial
hygiene»;
«Prevention, tr eatment and control o f epidemic,
endemic, occupational and other diseases»; and
«creating conditions that would ensure all medical care
and medical assistance in the event of illness»[6].
Progressive international norms in securing the right of
citizens to health protection ha ve taken a rather liberal
approach to the obligations of States to ensure the
implementation of this right. The very concept of
ensuring the right to health care, taking into account the
«maximum available resources», is aimed at reali zing
this right takin g into account the economic
development of a particular state, which has become the
basis for the formation of different standards at various
levels of the socio -economic system. This norm, of
course, reduces the absoluteness of this r ight, which
implies t he existence of different understandings in the
national legislation of states. In addition to the
ICESCR, the right to health is detailed in the Charter of
the World Health Organization. This document, also
based on the concept of «th e highest attainable
standard» of health, assumes the implementation of this
right, provided on the principle of reasonableness. In
this case, the place of the state is determined as a
regulator in equalizing the social situation with regard
to health. The reasonableness of th is norm can be
justified by the factor that the achievements of science
in the field of healthcare, the development of the level
of medical services, the demographic, epidemiological
and economic situation are beyond the control of the
state. However, ther e are factors that are beyond the
control of the state. But one thing can be said that a
wide range of international and regional acts recognize
health as fundamental human rights, while international
standards go far beyond healthcare . A review of
interna tional documents, including those that explain
and interpret international norms, shows that the right
to health includes state activities aimed at creating
conditions for providing drinking water, adequate
sanitation, and adequate nut rition, which obliges States
to adhere to certain standards that cover the social
dimension. In order to protect human rights in
emergencies, the Syracuse principles were adopted by
the United Nations Economic and Social Council in
1984. The need to adopt the Syracuse principl es arose
from the need to define minimum standards of

American Scientific Journal № ( 41) / 2020 43

fundamental rights in the context of restrictions and
derogations from the provisions of the international
Covenant on civil and political rights. The Syracuse
principles, in partic ular, state that rest rictions must be
at least:
- provided for and implemented in accordance
with the law;
- aimed at achieving a legitimate goal of
common interest;
- the state that imposes restrictions must
demonstrate that these restrictions do not interfe re with
the democratic functioning of society;
- based on scientific evidence and not arbitrary
and non -discriminatory in application;
- protecting freedom of expression and ensuring
access to important information[7].
Under international human rights law,
governments are required to protect the right to
freedom of expression, including the right to seek,
receive and impart information of any kind, regardless
of borders. The above -mentioned permissible
restrictions on freedom of expression for reasons of
pub lic health c annot jeopardize the right itself. In
international law, States that are parties to various
treaties undertake tripartite obligations: (1) to respect
the right to health by refraining from direct violations,
such as systemic discrimination in the health system;
(2) to protect the right from interference by third parties
through measures such as environmen tal regulation of
third parties; and (3) creating conditions for the
realization of this right by taking systematic measures
aimed at ensuring universal access to medical care, as
well as preconditions for health[8], therefore, agreeing
with the opinion of Alicia Eli Yamin, it is necessary to
say that it is wrong to think about the right to health in
terms of a package of medical services, and e ven a
package of services that goes beyond medical care. But
it should be considered as a complex of international
and national obligations, on the basis of which the
state’s socio -economic policy should be built[9]. In
regulating the protection of the rig ht to health, who's
legal tools are becoming important, as who is the main
global intergovernmental health body. I n fact, the
opportunities for WHO to adopt such tools are
significant. The WHO Constitution provides for the
adoption of three different types of instruments aimed
at ensuring law: conventions, rules and
recommendations, which can be found in Articles 19,
21 and 23 [10]. WHO has committed itself to
mainstreaming human rights in health programs and
policies at the national and regional levels, co nsidering
the fundamental determinants of health as part of an
integrated approach to health and human rights. WHO
was the first organization to establish the right to health.
The preamble to the WHO Constitution defines the
concept of «health» and recogni zes health as a right
which is a state of complete physical, mental and social
well -being, and not just the absenc e of diseases and
physical defects[10]. In relation to the right to health,
the preamble refers to the link between health problems
and unequa l development in different countries, the
importance of healthy child development and the
importance of informed o pinion and active public
cooperation: concepts that are still relevant today. The
adoption of the right to health by who was a
breakthrough in international health and human rights
law and provided an important starting point for the
further development of the right to health in human
rights instruments. In 1978, two United Nations
organizations, the world health organization and
UNICEF, held a joint conference in Almaty in the
Soviet Union, where health was described as a human
right to which all people ar e entitled. The goal of
achieving health for all by the end of the century has
been achieved. At this conference, the Alma -Ata
Declaration on Primary Health Care was adopted. It
was approved on September 12, 1978 and inspired next
generations of health act ivists. This has become a
common platform for meetings where like -minded
public health can compare and discuss strategy and
relate their discu ssion to a common document. The
slogan «Health for All by the Year 2000», although not
achieved, was a united appe al to progressive health
workers and activists. The Declaration also inspired the
global movement for human health and the two world
health as semblies. The concept of «primary health
care» is critical to improving the health systems of
many countries, and although its meaning is interpreted
in different ways, the pursuit of the ideal of integrated
primary health care continues to motivate health
workers around the world who want to provide a more
people -oriented, responsive and effective health system
for t heir community and country.
Thus, the Alma -Ata Declaration is a very
remarkable document and had an impact that few had
before or after. The right to health protection as one of
the key human rights is recognized in other document s
that form the norms of international law. Article 5 (e)
(iv) of the International Convention on the elimination
of all forms of racial discrimination of 1965, in art icles
11.1 (f) and 12 of the Convention on the elimination of
all forms of discrimination against women of 1979, and
article 24 of the Convention on the rights of the child
of 1989. Acts of regional organizations have played a
significant role in shaping i nternational standards of
socio -economic human rights. The flagship in this area
can be c onsidered the documents adopted by the
European Union. The idea of a «European Union health
policy» has always been somewhat paradoxical. On the
one hand, the norms of the founding treaties of the
European Union at the initial stage of formation did not
provide for any articles that would specifically enshrine
the right to health protection, giving priority to the
national mechanism of legal regulation. The lack of
lega l regulation of relations in the field of health care
was compensated by the norms that s et out the
obligations of States in the sphere of ensuring socio -
economic rights and securing these rights for all EU
citizens. Of course, this situation has created a
discrepancy in the regulatory framework and in the
level and quality of ensuring the rig ht to health
protection. Despite the absence of a norm regulating the
implementation of health rights in the fundamental
treaties of the 1950s, health issues are refle cted in the
provisions regulating the EU's competence in the field
of health. Among the a cts of the European Union an

44 American Scientific Journal № ( 41) / 2020
important place is occupied by the European Social
Charter of 1961, as amended (Article 11), which sets
forth the basic obligations of the contracting parties to
ensure the «effective exercise of the right to health
care»[11].
In the Eurasian space, the procedure for regulating
and ensuring socio -economic rights, including the right
to health protection, is based on CIS regulations. Such
doc uments include the Convention of the
Commonwealth of Independent States on Human
Rights a nd Fundamental Freedoms of May 26, 1995
(Minsk). Analysis of international legal documents
shows that international law in the field of health
combines international s tandard -setting instruments
adopted within the framework of who activities and in
accorda nce with international human rights law. It
should be noted that, at the same time, international
legal norms and other (optional) standards related to
health are ensh rined in a number of norms of other
branches of international law. Thus, some provisions of
the right to health protection are reflected in
international humanitarian and environmental law, in
the field of medical ethics and the rights of patients. In
addi tion, some international legal instruments have an
indirect impact on health, such as the world trade
organization (WTO) agreement on trade -related
intellectual property rights (trips).
As we understand it, the value of each legal norm
that enshrines huma n rights and freedoms lies in the
possibility of its implementation and protection, which
also applies to the right to health protection. The
practice of international activity is highlighted by some
mechanisms aimed at observing and implementing the
norms of international law. Such mechanisms include
control mechanisms for monitoring the stat e of human
rights.
Control in international law is one of the most
important institutions aimed at ensuring human rights.
Control, its forms and methods, both in the p ast and
present, and in the future, is a constantly evolving
process. Valeev R. M. Intern ational legal practice as
indicated by Valeev identifies the following methods
and methods of control: exchange of information,
consultations on the implementation of international
obligations, reports, reports, observations, international
inspections and investigations, judicial and arbitration
control [12].
The analysis of the methods of international
control and the legal consequences arising from its
results indica te different levels, degrees and intensity of
the control subjects performing this contro l and
procedural activity.
f the exchange of information, consultation,
reporting, reports, monitoring, as control methods are
applied, usually in the early stages of control, and
control mostly ends with recommendations,
suggestions objects control the e limination of revealed
violations, the international inspection, investigations,
addressing violations of international obligations by
international judicial instituti ons can cause a state
responsibility. n fact, the results of control activities,
regardle ss of the method of control, can always entail
the responsibility of the state if violations of Treaty
obligations are detected during the audit. But the degree
and na ture of the verification activity and the
consequences that may arise after verification of the
fulfillment of international obligations by judicial
institutions, as well as the results of inspections or
investigations, are of a different nature - up to th e
adoption of collective measures against the violating
state or the transfer of material s to the Security Council.
Such a classification is conditional, since each of the
control methods can be combined with each other,
supplement or precede the other. Th us, we can
conclude that international control is a rather
multifaceted institution of in ternational law.
Article 12 of the ICESCR recognizes the right of
everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable
standard of physical and mental health (often re ferred
to simply as the right to health). This norm also sets out
the obligations of Stat es parties to take steps to achieve
the full realization of the right to health by, for example,
ensuring the health of infants and children, improving
environmental c onditions and safety at work,
preventing epidemics and occupational diseases, and
ensurin g health for all. Under article 12, States parties
are required to respect, protect and fulfil the right to
health, including the right to medical care and the
fundame ntal determinants of health, such as nutritious
food, drinking water and safe housing, by taking
concrete and targeted measures.
Fulfilling these obligations requires complex
processes and efforts on the part of the state. For
example, the state is requir ed to implement a non -
discriminatory and effective health system; that it
guarantees the availability and availability of clean
water and essential medicines; and much more [13].
Many state actors are involved in the implementation
of these processes. From the point of view of the right
to health protection, these subjects are the bearers of
responsibilities. Oversight and monitoring of the
actions of these actors in relation to their
responsibilities is important. Thus, these responsible
entities can be he ld accountable if they fail to meet their
respective obligations and responsibilities or abuse
their authority. Accountability is an important
component in the realization of the right to health, and
accountability mechanisms play a crucial role in the
ov ersight process needed to strengthen the realization
of this ri ght. When monitoring or monitoring
compliance with the right to health by States parties, the
complexity is a blurring of the concept, because
scientists have rightly criticized that it is inac curate,
only gradually implemented and often unworkable.
There is therefore an urgent need to examine the
possibilities and limitations of the right to health in this
context.
Accountability is a key component of ensuring
human rights, including the right to health. In General
Comment No. 9 on the domestic applicatio n of the
Covenant, the UN Committee on economic, social and
cultural rights, the body responsible for monitoring the
implementation of the Covenant, stressed that the
Central obligation of Stat es parties to the ICESCR is to
ensure that the rights recognize d in the instruments are
fulfilled. Although the ICESCR applies a flexible

American Scientific Journal № ( 41) / 2020 45

approach that allows governments to take into account
the particularities of their legal and administrative
systems, S tates must nevertheless use all means at their
disposal to impl ement the rights recognized in the
Covenant.
Accountability is crucial to ensuring that States
parties meet their obligations under the Covenant.
There are various accountability mechanisms,
including judicial, quasi -judicial, administrative,
political an d social mechanisms. While the forms of
monitoring mechanisms may differ in ensuring human
rights, the purpose of each mechanism is to ensure that
any state is responsible for its actions or om issions in
relation to the right to health and that rights hold ers
have effective remedies for violations of their rights.
There are a number of potential remedies for violations
of the right to health, which include restitution,
compensation and rehabilit ation aimed at addressing
the consequences of rights violations for individual
rights holders or groups of rights holders. Enforcement
of rights and organizational and legal guarantees are
means of protection aimed at eliminating violations of
rights at th e system level.
It is important to note that «accountability» is
sometimes understood as guilt and punishment, while
it is more accurately considered as a process of
determining which norms are applied (so that it can be
recommended to others) and which n orms do not apply
(in order to adjust and increase the effectiv eness of the
application of norms in states[14]. In this sense, the
responsibility to respect human rights also depends on
the participation of citizens and social groups in all
decision -making processes related to health. In this
case, the state ensures t he participation of citizens
through the establishment of accountability
mechanisms and effective remedies. In addition,
individuals and groups have the right to participate
constructively in t he design and development of health
policies, as well as in mon itoring and evaluating the
implementation of these policies. In order to enable
public participation in compliance monitoring
processes, the state should establish fair and transparent
processe s that are accessible and cover different
groups. Methods of pa rticipation vary, but may include
regional or national conferences, local health
committees, focus groups, budget oversight, and public
meetings. Effective monitoring and evaluation by the
gove rnment, civil society and rights hold ers also
requires transparency. Governments are required to
provide information to the public about their efforts to
realize the right to health.
The main body that monitors the observance of
human rights is the UN. T he implementation of human
rights by S tates parties is monitored by UN committees
(Treaty bodies) that are linked to the six main
conventions (CCPR, CESCR, CERD, CEDAW, CAT,
CRC). Committees develop interpretations, set
standards, monitor compliance, promo te compliance,
and investigate human r ights violations. The
Commission on human rights plays an important role in
enhancing compliance with Treaty obligations by
States parties. The main monitoring mechanism is the
appointment of special rapporteurs, indep endent
experts, and groups to monitor and report on thematic
human rights issues or on regions and countries.
The UN human rights Committee is a body of
independent experts that monitors the implementation
of the International Covenant on civil and politi cal
rights by States parties. All States parties are required
to report regularly to the Committee on how rights are
being implemented. The state must submit an initial
report one year after becoming a party to the Covenant,
and then at the request of the Committee (usually every
four year s). The Committee examines each report and
presents its views and recommendations to the state
party in the form of «concluding observations».
The Committee on economic, social and cultural
rights (CESCR) is a body of ind ependent experts that
monitors the implementation of the International
Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights by
States parties. The Committee was established in
accordance with ECOSOC resolution 1985/17 of 28
may 1985 to perform the monitoring f unctions assigned
to the United Na tions Economic and social Council
(ECOSOC) in part IV of the Covenant. All States
parties are required to submit regular reports to the
Committee on the implementation of the relevant
rights. States must submit an initial report within two
years of becomin g parties to the Covenant and every
five years thereafter. The Committee examines each
report and submits its views and recommendations to
the state party in the form of «concluding
observations». In addition to the report ing procedure,
the optional Protoc ol to the International Covenant on
economic, social and cultural rights, which entered into
force on 5 March 2013, empowers the Committee to
receive and consider communications from individuals
claiming that their rights under the Covenant have been
viola ted. In certain circumstances, the Committee may
also investigate gross or systematic violations of
economic, social and cultural rights set forth in the
Covenant and consider inter -state complaints.
Monitoring the impleme ntation of obligations related to
economic, social and cultural rights ensures that the
following results are achieved:
■ identifies which state obligations are being met
and which are not being met;
■ monitoring identifies the sources and nature of
violat ions, as well as problems in the i mplementation
of economic, social and cultural rights.
■ based on the monitoring findings, priorities for
further actions are determined and suggestions are
made for where resources can be allocated.
■ the Committee can supp ort legis lative
advocacy and policy development, as well as public
awareness campaigns.
In 2000, the Committee on economic, social and
cultural rights issued General Comment 14(Twenty -
second session, 2000) [15] explaining the three
obligations of States w ith regar d to the right to health:
respect, protect, and execute. These obligations are
ensured by the accountability of States to international
human rights institutions. State accountability is a key
component of human rights, including the right to
heal th. In Ge neral Comment No. 9 on the domestic
application of the Covenant, the UN Committee on

46 American Scientific Journal № ( 41) / 2020
economic, social and cultural rights, the body
responsible for monitoring the implementation of the
Covenant, stressed that the Central obligation of States
parti es to the ICESCR is to ensure that The rights
recognized in the Covenant are fulfilled[16]. While the
ICESCR applies a flexible approach that allows
governments to take into account the particularities of
their legal and administrative systems, governments
should n evertheless use all means at their disposal to
implement the rights recognized in the act. As practice
shows, including the right to health in a state
Constitution or Statute may not even be necessary for
citizens to make a right to health claim a gainst st ate
health policy. In the absence of a clearly expressed
national right to health protection, citizens turn to
international legal documents or claims based on the
national right to life, dignity or integrity of the person.
As a result, legal clai ms challe nging priority setting
pose a challenge to governments engaged in clear
priority setting, regardless of whether the right to health
has been included in the national Constitution. Health
is a fundamental human right necessary for the
enjoyment of other hum an rights. Everyone has the
right to the highest attainable standard of health that
contributes to a decent life. The right to health can be
realized through many complementary approaches,
such as the development of health policies or the
implemen tation of health programmes developed by
the world health organization (who), or the adoption of
specific legal instruments. In addition, the right to
health includes certain components that are legally
binding. As part of the comprehensive implementation
of the ri ght to health protection in the framework of CIS
activities, the inter – parliamentary Assembly of the
Commonwealth of Independent States developed
recommendations «on the approximation of the
legislation of the CIS member States in the field of
health pro tection». Of course, in contrast to reports and
consideration of complaints about non -compliance
with human rights, recommendations are less effective,
but still model legislation is a guide for the formation
of national legislation in the field o f protect ion of the
right to health.
In 2018, the permanent commissions of the IPA
CIS held 20 scheduled meetings, including one visiting
session in Yerevan. Scheduled meetings of the joint
Commission under the IPA CIS on harmonization of
legislation in t he field of security and countering new
challenges and threats, the Expert Council on health
under the IPA CIS, the Expert Council under the
Standing Commission of the IPA CIS on legal issues
were also held [17]. Within the framework of CIS
activities in t he field of ensuring the right to health
protection, draft model laws were prepared «on
ensuring the rights of children to health protection in
the CIS member States», «on psychiatric care and
guarantees of citizens 'rights in its provisio n»,«on organ
don ation», «on access to information about the legal
status of citizens»[17].
The analysis of international acts and international
practice shows that the implementation and protection
of the right to health protection enshrined in
internatio nal acts reveals a number of problems. These
problems are acute in the context of the COVID -19
pandemic.
Recent events in the context of the COVID -19
virus outbreak have shown that there are certain
problems in implementing the right to health protection
worldwide. On Ma rch 6, 2020, the UN panel of experts
on human rights stated that «emergency statements
based on the COVID -19 outbreak, which stated that
«should not be used as a basis for targeting specific
groups, minorities or individuals. It should not serve as
a cover for repressive actions under the guise of
protecting health. It should not be used simply to
suppress dissent»[18]. Governments are responsible for
providing the information necessary to protect and
promote rights, including the right to h ealth. The
Commi ttee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
considers the provision of «education and access to
information regarding the main public health problems
in society, including methods for preventing and
combating them,» as the «main obligation ». The
COVID -19 compliance response must ensure that
accurate and up -to-date information about the virus,
access to services, service failures, and other aspects of
the outbreak response is available and accessible.
As with all international human rights, the
implementat ion and enforcement of the right to health
depend crucially on legislative and judicial action at the
national level. More than 70 national constitutions
recognize the right to health, and many more countries
legislate on various asp ects of the right to he alth. In
addition, the recent clarification of regulatory
obligations has allowed more attention to be paid to
potential violations of the right to health under the
Treaty. Monitoring committees in their «concluding
observations» - or decisions on complian ce by States -
as well as in implementation by quasi -judicial
international institutions and national courts in specific
cases.
Bibliography:
1. 1. G.Belova, G.Bazarova International -legal
regulation of socio -economic policy issues in th e CIS//
Серия «Право ». № 2(78)/2015.
2. Воронцов А.Л. Воронцова Е.В.
Международно -правовое взаимодействие
государств в области охраны здоровья: анализ
современной практики//
3. Бартенев Д.Г. Право на охрану здоровья в
международном праве (автореферат)//
https ://www .dissercat .com /conte nt/pravo -na-okhranu -
zdorovya -v-mezhdunarodnom -prave //
https ://www .dissercat .com /content /pravo -na-okhranu -
zdorovya -v-mezhdunarodnom -prave
4. Пащенко И.Ю . Право на охрану здоровья и
медицинскую помощь в системе социальных прав
человека и гражданина//Наука. Мысл ь:
электронный периодический журнал -2016. -№ 10. –
С.153
5. Всеобщая декларация прав человека
Принята резолюцией 217 А
(III ) Генеральной Ассамблеи ООН от 10
декабря 1948
года// https ://www .un .org /ru/documents /decl _conv /de
clarations /declhr .shtml

American Scientific Journal № ( 41) / 2020 47

6. Международный п акт об экономических,
социальных и культурных правах. Принят
резолюцией 2200 А ( XXI ) Генеральной Ассамблеи
от 16 декабря 1966 года//
https ://www .un .org /ru/documents /decl _conv /conventi
ons /pactecon .shtml
7. Сиракузские Принципы Толкования
Ограничений и Отступлений от Полож ений
Международного Пакта о Гражданских и
Политических Правах (1985)// http ://health -
rights .org
8. Комитет ООН по экономическим,
социальным и культурным правам. О бщий
комментарий 14: Право на наивысший достижимый
уровень здоровья. Женева, Швейцария:
Организация Объединенных Наций: 2000.
Документ ООН.:
http ://www .unhchr .ch/tbs /doc .nsf/(symbol )/EC 12.200
0.4. En ?OpenDocument . Доступ 26 апреля 2005 г//
9. Alicia E.Y. The Right to Health under
International Law and Its Relevance to the United
States// https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/
10. УСТАВ (КОНСТИТУЦИЯ)
ВСЕМИРНОЙ ОРГАНИЗАЦИИ
ЗДРАВО ОХРАНЕНИЯ//
https ://www .who .int /governance /eb/who _constitution
_ru.pdf
11. Европейская Со циальная Хартия
(пересмотренная) Страсбург, 3 мая 1996
https ://www .coe .int /ru/web /moscow /evro pejskaa -
social -naa -hartia
12. Валеев Р. М. Контроль в современном
международном праве: Автореферат диссертации
на соискание ученой степени доктора юридических
наук. Специальность 12.00.10 - Международное
право - Казань,1999. - 41 с.
13. CESCR , Замечание общего по рядка № 9,
Внутреннее применение
Пакта, док. E / C.12 / 1998/24 (1998), пункт. 1.
14. Koplan JP, Bond TC , Merson MH , Reddy
KS , Rodriguez MH , Sewankambo NK , Wasserheit JN .
Towards a common definition of global health. Lancet
2009; 373(9679):1993 -1995.
15. Комитет О ОН по экономическим,
социальным и культурным правам ( CESCR ),
Замечание общего порядка № 14: Право на
наивысший достижимый уровень здоровья (статья
12 Пакта), 11 августа 2000 г., E / C.12 / 2000/4
доступно по адресу:
https ://www .refworld .org /docid /4538838 d0.html [по
состоянию на 16 апреля 2020 года]
16. COMPILATION OF GENE RAL
COMMENTS AND GENERAL
RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY HUMAN
RIGHTS TREATY BODIES. Note by the Secretariat//
https://www.ohchr.org/RU/HRBodi es/Pages/
17. Информация об итогах деятельности
Межпарламентской Ассамблеи государств ―
участников СНГ в 2018 году//
ttps ://iacis .ru/pressroom /news /sovet _mpa _sng /
18. United Nations. Protecting human rights
amid COVID -19 crisis.
https://www.un.org/ru/coronavirus/protecting -human -
rights -amid -covid -19-crisis