Web-Books
in the Austria-Forum
Austria-Forum
Web-Books
Coronavirus
VULNERABLE - The Law, Policy and Ethics of COVID-19
Page - 535 -
  • User
  • Version
    • full version
    • text only version
  • Language
    • Deutsch - German
    • English

Page - 535 - in VULNERABLE - The Law, Policy and Ethics of COVID-19

Image of the Page - 535 -

Image of the Page - 535 - in VULNERABLE - The Law, Policy and Ethics of COVID-19

Text of the Page - 535 -

535The Plausibility and Resolvability of Legal Claims Against China and WHO under… drawn from law, rather than the less efficient tit-for-tats that charac- terize feuds between antagonistic great powers and, less frequently, international organizations. The factual and legal analysis provided herein is dependent upon facts still being reported and revised. Nevertheless, the chapter is a roadmap to reconsideration of some of the IHR (2005)’s functions and a guide to the legality of actions and measures taken by major actors over the course of a rapidly unfold- ing pandemic. The process leading to the International Health Regulations (2005) was facilitated by recognition at the highest national and inter- national organizational levels that infectious diseases posed a threat to global security, a threat of sufficient magnitude to implicate the United Nations Security Council’s authority under the UN Charter. The 1980s witnessed the emergence and increase in the incidence of viral hemorrhagic fevers and HIV. By 1995, the number of people in Africa living with HIV/AIDS rose dramatically, accounting for the vast majority of people living with HIV/AIDS globally.2 In response, the World Health Assembly adopted resolutions charging the WHO Director-General with identifying new responses to new and re-emerging infectious diseases, because the existing International Health Regulations did not address novel infectious agents and failed to provide for an adequate response to those that were covered.3 In 2000, the UN Security Council recognized infectious disease as an international peace and security issue.4 Between 2000 and 2002, negotiations for a revised IHR languished at WHO. In late 2002, an epidemic of atypical pneumonia erupted in China’s Guangdong Province. China failed to disclose to WHO the emergence of the disease that would later become known as SARS until a doctor who had treated patients in Guangdong devel- oped symptoms while in Hong Kong. The pathogen infected hotel guests, patients, and contacts in Hong Kong, Vietnam, Singapore, and Canada. Because SARS was not a notifiable disease under the IHR as they then existed, China had no legal obligation to report 2. Jonathan M Mann & Daniel JM Tarantola, eds, AIDS  in  the  World II:  Global  Dimensions, Social Roots, and Reponses (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996). 3. World Health Organization, “Strengthening Health Security by Implementing the International Health Regulations (2005)” (2005), online: World  Health  Organization  <http://www.who.int/ihr/revisionprocess/revision/en/index.html>. 4. Alex de Waal, “HIV/AIDS and the Challenges of Security and Conflict” (2010) 375:9708 The Lancet 22.
back to the  book VULNERABLE - The Law, Policy and Ethics of COVID-19"
VULNERABLE The Law, Policy and Ethics of COVID-19
Title
VULNERABLE
Subtitle
The Law, Policy and Ethics of COVID-19
Authors
Vanessa MacDonnell
Jane Philpott
Sophie Thériault
Sridhar Venkatapuram
Publisher
Ottawa Press
Date
2020
Language
English
License
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
ISBN
9780776636429
Size
15.2 x 22.8 cm
Pages
648
Categories
Coronavirus
International
Web-Books
Library
Privacy
Imprint
Austria-Forum
Austria-Forum
Web-Books
VULNERABLE