Pub Date : 2022-06-29DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19010006
S. Negri, Mark Eccleston-Turner
The covid-19 pandemic and other major public health emergencies of international concern occurred in the last 20 years remind us of the close interconnections between human, animal, and environmental health and the need for collaborative and multisectoral approaches to address complex health threats. These outbreaks also serve to highlight the importance of timely sharing of pathogens, which are used to characterise the causative agent of an outbreak, understand its spread, and develop diagnostics, antiviral treatments, and vaccines. Despite their relevance to preparedness and response, neither One Health nor pathogen sharing are grounded within the International Health Regulations (ihr). This paper analyses the existing institutional and normative gaps within the ihr, including examining how other regimes within the international legal landscape have sought to ‘fill the gaps’. We explore possible solutions and make proposals to strengthen interinstitutional cooperation and coordination through mechanisms alternative to ihr reform or a global pandemic treaty.
{"title":"One Health and Pathogen Sharing: Filling the Gap in the International Health Regulations to Strengthen Global Pandemic Preparedness and Response","authors":"S. Negri, Mark Eccleston-Turner","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19010006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19010006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The covid-19 pandemic and other major public health emergencies of international concern occurred in the last 20 years remind us of the close interconnections between human, animal, and environmental health and the need for collaborative and multisectoral approaches to address complex health threats. These outbreaks also serve to highlight the importance of timely sharing of pathogens, which are used to characterise the causative agent of an outbreak, understand its spread, and develop diagnostics, antiviral treatments, and vaccines. Despite their relevance to preparedness and response, neither One Health nor pathogen sharing are grounded within the International Health Regulations (ihr). This paper analyses the existing institutional and normative gaps within the ihr, including examining how other regimes within the international legal landscape have sought to ‘fill the gaps’. We explore possible solutions and make proposals to strengthen interinstitutional cooperation and coordination through mechanisms alternative to ihr reform or a global pandemic treaty.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49055598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-29DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19010002
L. Forman, S. Sekalala, B. Meier
This article examines the influence of human rights law on infectious disease control through the World Health Organization (who) International Health Regulations (‘IHR’). The who’s evolving work to mainstream human rights in global health governance strongly influenced the 2005 revision of the ihr, framing a new balance between health and human rights in public health emergencies. The 2005 ihr make respect for human rights a central principle and integrate human rights standards in explicit and implicit ways. Yet these reforms also fail to reflect economic, social and cultural rights, inadequately connect to the UN human rights system, and leave unresolved significant legal issues with major impacts on human rights. These weaknesses have been exposed by the covid-19 pandemic, as national pandemic responses have tested who’s authority under the ihr and disproportionately and unjustifiably restricted a range of human rights. Resolving these gaps will require both normative and institutional reforms that bring together human rights and global health governance, including through broader rights-based partnerships amongst international organizations.
{"title":"The World Health Organization, International Health Regulations and Human Rights Law","authors":"L. Forman, S. Sekalala, B. Meier","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19010002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19010002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article examines the influence of human rights law on infectious disease control through the World Health Organization (who) International Health Regulations (‘IHR’). The who’s evolving work to mainstream human rights in global health governance strongly influenced the 2005 revision of the ihr, framing a new balance between health and human rights in public health emergencies. The 2005 ihr make respect for human rights a central principle and integrate human rights standards in explicit and implicit ways. Yet these reforms also fail to reflect economic, social and cultural rights, inadequately connect to the UN human rights system, and leave unresolved significant legal issues with major impacts on human rights. These weaknesses have been exposed by the covid-19 pandemic, as national pandemic responses have tested who’s authority under the ihr and disproportionately and unjustifiably restricted a range of human rights. Resolving these gaps will require both normative and institutional reforms that bring together human rights and global health governance, including through broader rights-based partnerships amongst international organizations.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45305776","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-29DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19010007
Pedro A. Villarreal, Roojin Habibi, Allyn L. Taylor
The current article aims to undertake a retrospective and a prospective analysis of compliance monitoring under the International Health Regulations of 2005 (ihr (2005)). First, different theoretical understandings of compliance are discussed. The study then focuses on a ‘triad’ of obligations under the ihr (2005): 1) to timely and effectively notify the World Health Organization (who) of events that may constitute public health emergencies of international concern (Article 6 ihr); 2) to notify and justify additional health measures restricting international travel and trade in response to events elsewhere (Article 43 ihr); and, 3) to build minimum core capacities required to conduct pandemic surveillance and response activities (Article 5 ihr). The retrospective analysis revisits the fate of past and current mechanisms of compliance monitoring under the ihr (2005). Lastly, a prospective formulation builds upon the elements of the retrospective analysis, sketching a possible way forward for monitoring of compliance with the ihr (2005).
{"title":"Strengthening the Monitoring of States’ Compliance with the International Health Regulations","authors":"Pedro A. Villarreal, Roojin Habibi, Allyn L. Taylor","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19010007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19010007","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The current article aims to undertake a retrospective and a prospective analysis of compliance monitoring under the International Health Regulations of 2005 (ihr (2005)). First, different theoretical understandings of compliance are discussed. The study then focuses on a ‘triad’ of obligations under the ihr (2005): 1) to timely and effectively notify the World Health Organization (who) of events that may constitute public health emergencies of international concern (Article 6 ihr); 2) to notify and justify additional health measures restricting international travel and trade in response to events elsewhere (Article 43 ihr); and, 3) to build minimum core capacities required to conduct pandemic surveillance and response activities (Article 5 ihr). The retrospective analysis revisits the fate of past and current mechanisms of compliance monitoring under the ihr (2005). Lastly, a prospective formulation builds upon the elements of the retrospective analysis, sketching a possible way forward for monitoring of compliance with the ihr (2005).","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45638333","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-29DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19010001
G. Burci, S. Negri
The International Health Regulations (ihr) have been severely tested by the covid-19 pandemic. Recent reviews have identified a number of gaps and challenges and proposed improvement, but the Regulations should be analysed in their context as a constitutional instrument deeply embedded in who’s governance to better understand their systemic strengths and weaknesses. The ihr embody a managerial model of health governance that aims at depoliticizing international response to health emergencies and coordinating it on the basis of expertise and persuasion. The political crisis accompanying the covid-19 pandemic, however, reveals the need for a different and more political approach that injects states in the governance of the ihr following models tested by other international agreements. It also highlights the need for a more effective framework of cooperation and coordination that builds upon who’s practice of inter-institutional cooperation but complements it through institutional consultation structures involving directly states parties.
{"title":"The International Health Regulations as a who Constitutional Instrument: Internal Governance and Regime Interactions","authors":"G. Burci, S. Negri","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19010001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19010001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The International Health Regulations (ihr) have been severely tested by the covid-19 pandemic. Recent reviews have identified a number of gaps and challenges and proposed improvement, but the Regulations should be analysed in their context as a constitutional instrument deeply embedded in who’s governance to better understand their systemic strengths and weaknesses. The ihr embody a managerial model of health governance that aims at depoliticizing international response to health emergencies and coordinating it on the basis of expertise and persuasion. The political crisis accompanying the covid-19 pandemic, however, reveals the need for a different and more political approach that injects states in the governance of the ihr following models tested by other international agreements. It also highlights the need for a more effective framework of cooperation and coordination that builds upon who’s practice of inter-institutional cooperation but complements it through institutional consultation structures involving directly states parties.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43785804","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-29DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19010009
G. Burci, L. Forman, S. Hoffman
This special issue of the International Organizations Law Review is dedicated to the potential reform of the International Health Regulations (IHR)? It may be surprising to readers of this journal that a whole issue is focusing on a normative instrument rather than directly on an international institution. This choice may be explained by many factors that render the IHR a particularly interesting instrument at the crossroads of international law, the law of international organizations, and complex governance questions on how to produce a global public good such as the protection of humankind from the ravages of infectious diseases. The World Health Organization (WHO ), as the institutional custodian and manager of the IHR, has progressively and holistically integrated the latter into its governance as a component of its broader health emergency functions. The IHR -the primary legal instrument to prevent and control the international spread of disease -has also inevitably become a normative benchmark for other international institutions, thus raising delicate questions of regime complexity and coordination.2 The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified and exacerbated these issues and projected them to the highest level of international politics.(3)
{"title":"Introduction to a Special Issue on Reforming the International Health Regulations","authors":"G. Burci, L. Forman, S. Hoffman","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19010009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19010009","url":null,"abstract":"This special issue of the International Organizations Law Review is dedicated to the potential reform of the International Health Regulations (IHR)? It may be surprising to readers of this journal that a whole issue is focusing on a normative instrument rather than directly on an international institution. This choice may be explained by many factors that render the IHR a particularly interesting instrument at the crossroads of international law, the law of international organizations, and complex governance questions on how to produce a global public good such as the protection of humankind from the ravages of infectious diseases. The World Health Organization (WHO ), as the institutional custodian and manager of the IHR, has progressively and holistically integrated the latter into its governance as a component of its broader health emergency functions. The IHR -the primary legal instrument to prevent and control the international spread of disease -has also inevitably become a normative benchmark for other international institutions, thus raising delicate questions of regime complexity and coordination.2 The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified and exacerbated these issues and projected them to the highest level of international politics.(3)","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49646555","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-29DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19010008
S. Hoffman, Roojin Habibi, Pedro A. Villarreal, Sophie Campbell
International dispute resolution not only aims to redress wrongdoings, but also to deter states from violating obligations. Approaching the International Health Regulations (ihr) from this viewpoint and using recent global health crises as examples, this paper argues that dispute resolution must be strengthened in the ihr in order to protect global health security. While a diverse range of dispute resolution mechanisms exist in other legal regimes, this paper proposes that a three-pronged architecture consisting of a guidance mechanism, formal adjudicative mechanism, and recourse to the icj and binding arbitration would provide for the most efficient and timely response to a dispute between states parties. Importantly, this architecture can be used both prior to and during a global health crisis, and could incentivize states parties towards solidarity in the global public health response.
{"title":"Mending Dispute Resolution under the International Health Regulations","authors":"S. Hoffman, Roojin Habibi, Pedro A. Villarreal, Sophie Campbell","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19010008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19010008","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 International dispute resolution not only aims to redress wrongdoings, but also to deter states from violating obligations. Approaching the International Health Regulations (ihr) from this viewpoint and using recent global health crises as examples, this paper argues that dispute resolution must be strengthened in the ihr in order to protect global health security. While a diverse range of dispute resolution mechanisms exist in other legal regimes, this paper proposes that a three-pronged architecture consisting of a guidance mechanism, formal adjudicative mechanism, and recourse to the icj and binding arbitration would provide for the most efficient and timely response to a dispute between states parties. Importantly, this architecture can be used both prior to and during a global health crisis, and could incentivize states parties towards solidarity in the global public health response.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43394255","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-29DOI: 10.1163/15723747-19010003
Mark Eccleston-Turner, Pedro A. Villarreal
This paper evaluates the powers – both legal and non-legal – which the World Health Organization has at its disposal in an emergency. We demonstrate that the Director-General’s emergency decision-making powers are of concern for the relationship between the organization and Member States. We further question to whom it owes accountability as an international institution, and how to enhance it. Existing literature shows how the legal responsibility of international organizations for wrongful acts constitutes one type of accountability. Internal and external institutional inquiries into the who’s decision-making, though not deriving in legal responsibility, also represent distinct models of accountability. Against this backdrop, the article looks at past and ongoing events where the who Director-General’s emergency decision-making powers gave way to different modes of accountability, both within and beyond the organization. We provide concluding remarks focused on the need for enhanced accountability in the who’s exercise of emergency decision-making powers.
{"title":"The World Health Organization’s Emergency Powers: Enhancing Its Legal and Institutional Accountability","authors":"Mark Eccleston-Turner, Pedro A. Villarreal","doi":"10.1163/15723747-19010003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-19010003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper evaluates the powers – both legal and non-legal – which the World Health Organization has at its disposal in an emergency. We demonstrate that the Director-General’s emergency decision-making powers are of concern for the relationship between the organization and Member States. We further question to whom it owes accountability as an international institution, and how to enhance it. Existing literature shows how the legal responsibility of international organizations for wrongful acts constitutes one type of accountability. Internal and external institutional inquiries into the who’s decision-making, though not deriving in legal responsibility, also represent distinct models of accountability. Against this backdrop, the article looks at past and ongoing events where the who Director-General’s emergency decision-making powers gave way to different modes of accountability, both within and beyond the organization. We provide concluding remarks focused on the need for enhanced accountability in the who’s exercise of emergency decision-making powers.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48116080","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.1163/15723747-20220002
Niamh Kinchin
The General rules of interpretation in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (vclt) do not only apply to treaties; they also apply to the constitutions of International Organizations (io). A holistic approach to treaty interpretation that combines a textual application of the vclt with a teleological approach to the constitution’s “object and purpose” responds to the need to consider it as a living instrument. However, traditional treaty interpretation is less able to respond to an io’s need to behave as an organization with values and responsibilities that reflect contemporary expectations of accountability. Such challenges could be addressed through the adoption of an extended teleological approach, being the extension of the doctrine of implied powers to implied obligations. The application of implied obligations to the ‘responsibility to protect’ transforms it from a norm to binding legal duty and in doing so, addresses accountability gaps in international governance.
{"title":"‘With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility’: Implied Obligations and the Responsibility to Protect","authors":"Niamh Kinchin","doi":"10.1163/15723747-20220002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-20220002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The General rules of interpretation in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (vclt) do not only apply to treaties; they also apply to the constitutions of International Organizations (io). A holistic approach to treaty interpretation that combines a textual application of the vclt with a teleological approach to the constitution’s “object and purpose” responds to the need to consider it as a living instrument. However, traditional treaty interpretation is less able to respond to an io’s need to behave as an organization with values and responsibilities that reflect contemporary expectations of accountability. Such challenges could be addressed through the adoption of an extended teleological approach, being the extension of the doctrine of implied powers to implied obligations. The application of implied obligations to the ‘responsibility to protect’ transforms it from a norm to binding legal duty and in doing so, addresses accountability gaps in international governance.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46710641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-24DOI: 10.1163/15723747-20220001
L. Gruszczynski, M. Melillo
The World Health Organization (WHO) has attracted an unprecedented level of criticism over its handling of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. To enhance its legitimacy and better prepare for a future pandemic, various proposals to reform the WHO and the International Health Regulations have been made. Against this background, this article seeks to contribute to the ongoing discussions by investigating the nature of WHO’s work and its activities. Starting from the premise that much of the criticism stems from the uneasy coexistence of politics and expertise in WHO’s work, this article analyses some of the most controversial aspects of WHO’s initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic: (i) the alleged leniency towards China; (ii) the delay in declaring a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC); and (iii) the delay in recommending the use of face masks for the general population. The article shows that politics infiltrates WHO activities in different ways, influencing even the processes that are conventionally seen as purely technical and science-based. At the same time, it argues that the influence of politics in WHO’s work should not be seen as some kind of atrophy, but should rather be considered a natural element that should be managed rather than dreaded.
{"title":"The Uneasy Coexistence of Expertise and Politics in the World Health Organization","authors":"L. Gruszczynski, M. Melillo","doi":"10.1163/15723747-20220001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-20220001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The World Health Organization (WHO) has attracted an unprecedented level of criticism over its handling of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. To enhance its legitimacy and better prepare for a future pandemic, various proposals to reform the WHO and the International Health Regulations have been made. Against this background, this article seeks to contribute to the ongoing discussions by investigating the nature of WHO’s work and its activities. Starting from the premise that much of the criticism stems from the uneasy coexistence of politics and expertise in WHO’s work, this article analyses some of the most controversial aspects of WHO’s initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic: (i) the alleged leniency towards China; (ii) the delay in declaring a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC); and (iii) the delay in recommending the use of face masks for the general population. The article shows that politics infiltrates WHO activities in different ways, influencing even the processes that are conventionally seen as purely technical and science-based. At the same time, it argues that the influence of politics in WHO’s work should not be seen as some kind of atrophy, but should rather be considered a natural element that should be managed rather than dreaded.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44875836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-20DOI: 10.1163/15723747-18030002
G. Burci, Jennifer Hasselgard-Rowe
Transposing rule of law principles from the national to the international level, in particular to international organizations, still raises questions and can be problematic. However, rule of law considerations play an important role when international organizations exercise a substantial amount of public authority and may directly affect states as well as individuals. The World Health Organization (WHO), unlike other international organizations, has a constitutional mandate to prevent and respond to international acute emergencies in the form of disease outbreaks and pandemics. Its main normative tool is the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR), that represent a breakthrough from past instruments but also raise questions and challenges that can be effectively analyzed from a rule of law perspective. This approach applies in particular to ambiguities in important parts of the IHR affecting their relevance and effectiveness; lack of clarity for processes leading to sensitive executive decisions; the absence of compliance assessment mechanisms resulting in lack of accountability for states parties; and an inadequate inclusion of human rights guarantees. The analysis is extended beyond WHO’s functions, to the impact of COVID-19 on the organization’s governance as well as its internal management.
{"title":"Through the Rule of Law Looking Glass","authors":"G. Burci, Jennifer Hasselgard-Rowe","doi":"10.1163/15723747-18030002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-18030002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Transposing rule of law principles from the national to the international level, in particular to international organizations, still raises questions and can be problematic. However, rule of law considerations play an important role when international organizations exercise a substantial amount of public authority and may directly affect states as well as individuals. The World Health Organization (WHO), unlike other international organizations, has a constitutional mandate to prevent and respond to international acute emergencies in the form of disease outbreaks and pandemics. Its main normative tool is the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR), that represent a breakthrough from past instruments but also raise questions and challenges that can be effectively analyzed from a rule of law perspective. This approach applies in particular to ambiguities in important parts of the IHR affecting their relevance and effectiveness; lack of clarity for processes leading to sensitive executive decisions; the absence of compliance assessment mechanisms resulting in lack of accountability for states parties; and an inadequate inclusion of human rights guarantees. The analysis is extended beyond WHO’s functions, to the impact of COVID-19 on the organization’s governance as well as its internal management.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44440038","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：