Closing the Doors on Health Nationalism: The Non-emptiness of the Legal Duty to Cooperate in Pandemic Response under Lex Specialis

R. Essawy
{"title":"Closing the Doors on Health Nationalism: The Non-emptiness of the Legal Duty to Cooperate in Pandemic Response under Lex Specialis","authors":"R. Essawy","doi":"10.1163/18757413_02501021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"No one is safe until everyone is safe. Although this phrase has received wide consensus during COVID-19, this pandemic has witnessed a surge in health nationalism. States have imposed export restrictions on COVID-19-related medical supplies and vaccines seeking to preserve them for their own populations. This has adversely affected the availability of those necessary tools in other countries undermining their efforts in fighting the pandemic. Thus, it could be argued that States have violated their obligation to cooperate under Art. 44 of the 2005 World Health Organisation (WHO) International Health Regulations (IHR). Nevertheless, States’ export restrictions have been legally justified under the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT). Does this mean that the duty to cooperate is an empty obligation that fails to counter health nationalism? It is the purpose of this paper to demonstrate otherwise using the principle of lex specialis derogat legi generali. Under this principle, the duty to cooperate in pandemic response under Art. 44 of the IHR prevails over States’ rights under gatt, rendering health nationalism legally unjustified.","PeriodicalId":167092,"journal":{"name":"Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18757413_02501021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

No one is safe until everyone is safe. Although this phrase has received wide consensus during COVID-19, this pandemic has witnessed a surge in health nationalism. States have imposed export restrictions on COVID-19-related medical supplies and vaccines seeking to preserve them for their own populations. This has adversely affected the availability of those necessary tools in other countries undermining their efforts in fighting the pandemic. Thus, it could be argued that States have violated their obligation to cooperate under Art. 44 of the 2005 World Health Organisation (WHO) International Health Regulations (IHR). Nevertheless, States’ export restrictions have been legally justified under the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT). Does this mean that the duty to cooperate is an empty obligation that fails to counter health nationalism? It is the purpose of this paper to demonstrate otherwise using the principle of lex specialis derogat legi generali. Under this principle, the duty to cooperate in pandemic response under Art. 44 of the IHR prevails over States’ rights under gatt, rendering health nationalism legally unjustified.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关上卫生民族主义的大门:特别法下流行病应对合作法律义务的非空性
所有人都安全了才算安全。虽然这句话在2019冠状病毒病期间得到了广泛共识,但这次大流行见证了卫生民族主义的激增。各国对与covid -19相关的医疗用品和疫苗实施了出口限制,试图为本国民众保留这些用品和疫苗。这对其他国家获得这些必要工具产生了不利影响,破坏了它们防治这一流行病的努力。因此,可以辩称,各国违反了2005年世界卫生组织《国际卫生条例》第44条规定的合作义务。然而,根据贸易和关税总协定(关贸总协定),各国的出口限制在法律上是合理的。这是否意味着合作的义务是一种空洞的义务,无法对抗卫生民族主义?本文的目的是利用特别法的一般法律的克减原则来证明这一点。根据这一原则,《国际卫生条例》第44条规定的合作应对大流行病的义务优先于关贸总协定规定的国家权利,因此卫生民族主义在法律上是不合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Application of Teachings by the International Court of Justice, 2016–2022 Revisiting the Standard of Proof for Charges of Exceptional Gravity before the International Court of Justice The Legitimacy of the International Court of Justice from the Vantage Point of UN Members The International Court of Justice and Territorial Disputes: an Updated Systematization The ILC’s First Reading Draft Articles on ‘Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction’ (2022)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1