Using the courts to challenge irrational health research policies and administrative decisions.
While the judiciary has previously adjudicated on research-related matters, with several landmark cases having been heard in North America, the use of the judiciary in research-related matters in the developing world is relatively rare. Even rarer, both in developed and developing countries, is public-interest litigation in the health research context. South Africa is proving to be a trail-blazer in this respect. This work outlines three landmark South African cases where irrational, discriminatory, and arguably unethical decisions of government authorities pertaining to research were successfully challenged in the courts. The experience of South Africa demonstrates that while the courts should not generally interfere in the affairs of science, they can be a useful mechanism to reverse irrational ideology-driven science policy and decision-making.
Singh
Jerome Amir
JA
Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa. singhj9@ukzn.ac.za
D000349:Africa; D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006801:Humans; D007603:Jurisprudence