Roojin Habibi, S. Hoffman, G. Burci, T. C. D. Campos, Danwood Chirwa, Margherita M. Cinà, Stéphanie Dagron, Mark Eccleston-Turner, L. Forman, L. Gostin, B. Meier, S. Negri, G. Ooms, S. Sekalala, Allyn L. Taylor, A. Yamin
{"title":"斯泰伦博斯共识:国家对公共卫生风险的法律反应","authors":"Roojin Habibi, S. Hoffman, G. Burci, T. C. D. Campos, Danwood Chirwa, Margherita M. Cinà, Stéphanie Dagron, Mark Eccleston-Turner, L. Forman, L. Gostin, B. Meier, S. Negri, G. Ooms, S. Sekalala, Allyn L. Taylor, A. Yamin","doi":"10.1163/15723747-2020023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe International Health Regulations (ihr), of which the World Health Organization is custodian, govern how countries collectively promote global health security, including prevention, detection, and response to global health emergencies such as the ongoing covid-19 pandemic. Countries are permitted to exercise their sovereignty in taking additional health measures to respond to such emergencies if these measures adhere to Article 43 of this legally binding instrument. Overbroad measures taken during recent public health emergencies of international concern, however, reveal that the provision remains inadequately understood. A shared understanding of the measures legally permitted by Article 43 is a necessary step in ensuring the fulfillment of obligations, and fostering global solidarity and resilience in the face of future pandemics. In this consensus statement, public international law scholars specializing in global health consider the legal meaning of Article 43 using the interpretive framework of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/15723747-2020023","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Stellenbosch Consensus on Legal National Responses to Public Health Risks\",\"authors\":\"Roojin Habibi, S. Hoffman, G. Burci, T. C. D. Campos, Danwood Chirwa, Margherita M. Cinà, Stéphanie Dagron, Mark Eccleston-Turner, L. Forman, L. Gostin, B. Meier, S. Negri, G. Ooms, S. Sekalala, Allyn L. Taylor, A. Yamin\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15723747-2020023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe International Health Regulations (ihr), of which the World Health Organization is custodian, govern how countries collectively promote global health security, including prevention, detection, and response to global health emergencies such as the ongoing covid-19 pandemic. Countries are permitted to exercise their sovereignty in taking additional health measures to respond to such emergencies if these measures adhere to Article 43 of this legally binding instrument. Overbroad measures taken during recent public health emergencies of international concern, however, reveal that the provision remains inadequately understood. A shared understanding of the measures legally permitted by Article 43 is a necessary step in ensuring the fulfillment of obligations, and fostering global solidarity and resilience in the face of future pandemics. In this consensus statement, public international law scholars specializing in global health consider the legal meaning of Article 43 using the interpretive framework of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Organizations Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/15723747-2020023\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Organizations Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-2020023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Organizations Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-2020023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Stellenbosch Consensus on Legal National Responses to Public Health Risks
The International Health Regulations (ihr), of which the World Health Organization is custodian, govern how countries collectively promote global health security, including prevention, detection, and response to global health emergencies such as the ongoing covid-19 pandemic. Countries are permitted to exercise their sovereignty in taking additional health measures to respond to such emergencies if these measures adhere to Article 43 of this legally binding instrument. Overbroad measures taken during recent public health emergencies of international concern, however, reveal that the provision remains inadequately understood. A shared understanding of the measures legally permitted by Article 43 is a necessary step in ensuring the fulfillment of obligations, and fostering global solidarity and resilience in the face of future pandemics. In this consensus statement, public international law scholars specializing in global health consider the legal meaning of Article 43 using the interpretive framework of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
期刊介绍:
After the Second World War in particular, the law of international organizations developed as a discipline within public international law. Separate, but not separable. The International Organizations Law Review purports to function as a discussion forum for academics and practitioners active in the field of the law of international organizations. It is based on two pillars; one is based in the world of scholarship, the other in the world of practice. In the first dimension, the Journal focuses on general developments in international institutional law.