HIV/AIDS policy & law review最新文献

France enacted a new immigration law on 16 June 2011. Among other things, the law changes the criteria for issuing residence permits on medical grounds. Foreigners with a medical condition who apply for a residence permit must now show that treatment and care are unavailable in their country of origin. It is no longer sufficient to show a lack of effective access to such treatment or care.

In a judgment dated 11 April 20 11, the Ontario Superior Court declared that the Medical Marijuana Access Regulations (MMAR), and Sections 4 and 7 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA), that prohibit the possession and production of cannabis, are unconstitutional because, in practice, they prevent effective access to marijuana for therapeutic purposes, and therefore violate Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter).

On 10 March 2011, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held that refusing a residence permit to a foreign national solely on the basis of his HIV-positive status amounted to unlawful discrimination. This case is a significant boost to the rights of persons living with HIV/AIDS (PLHIV) in Europe and beyond.

This article contains summaries of the four presentations made during this panel. David Eby provides a framework for questions every organization should consider before deciding to proceed with litigation. Derek Olson discusses the criminal law of aggravated sexual assault as related to the strategic litigation in R v. Mabior. Jonathan Shime stresses the need for players in the legal sector to educate themselves better on the science surrounding HIV. Finally, Elin Sigurdson outlines the legal arguments advanced in SWUAV, British Columbia's parallel litigation to Ontario's Bedford case, challenging the constitutional validity of provisions of the Criminal Code that endanger the lives of sex workers.

This workshop examined some of the new challenges to health-related privacy emerging as a result of the proliferation of electronic communications and data storage, including through social media, electronic health records and ready access to personal information on the internet. The right to privacy is a human right. As such, protecting privacy and enforcing the duty of confidentiality regarding health information are fundamental to treating people with autonomy, dignity and respect. For people living with HIV, unauthorized disclosure of their status can lead to discrimination and breaches of other human rights. While this is not new, in this information age a new breed of privacy violation is emerging and our legal protections are not necessarily keeping pace.

The Criminal Code of Canada prohibits certain aspects of sex work: the keeping of a common bawdy-house, living off the avails of prostitution and communicating for the purposes of prostitution in a public place. These legal constraints impede sex workers' ability to practise their profession safely and without risk to their bodily integrity; they also impair their personal autonomy and can lead to their stigmatization. Bedford v. Canada is a groundbreaking case, since the applicants and intervening organizations seek to overturn aspects of Canadian law that specifically put the health and human rights of sex workers at risk.

In June 2011, the Press Ombudsman of Ireland ruled in favour of a coalition of three organizations that had lodged a complaint against the Irish Independent for a February 2011 column that strongly disparaged people who use drugs.

In June 2011, the United Nations General Assembly issued a Political Declaration on HIV and AIDS as a means to reaffirm its support for human rights and to call for the removal of barriers to treatment. The Declaration also explicitly recognizes key affected groups such as men who have sex with men (MSM), injection drug users (IDUs), and sex workers.

The International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) recently released new ethics guidelines in response to the continuing forced sterilization of women, including those living with HIV, in parts of the developing world.

In June 2011, fifteen months after he had been found guilty of hate speech and discrimination, African National Congress (ANC)Youth President Julius issued a formal apology and agreed to pay a R50,000 (CAN$7,120) fine that was part of the conviction.