Litigation as a strategy to hold governments accountable for implementing the right to health.
This article offers a framework for exploring litigation as a strategy to advance the right to health by holding governments accountable to human rights norms. Since the 1990s, cases in which people go to court to claim their right to health have increased dramatically in resource-poor countries. With issues ranging from access to health services and medication, to discriminatory labor practices, to public health, to the basic determinants of health (such as food, water, shelter, and a healthy environment), these cases potentially have huge financial and social implications. Little is known, however, about the success of such attempts to hold governments accountable for their obligations with respect to the right to health--or about who benefits. Is litigation primarily used by marginalized persons to gain fair access to medical services, or is it more often a means by which those patients with more financial resources or creativity in seeking assistance pursue access to treatment that is not otherwise provided due to expense? To what extent does litigation affect health policy and service delivery? What little is known about these cases is fragmented and anecdotal The theoretical framework outlined here facilitates the systematic comparative and interdisciplinary studies needed to advance knowledge in this field, taking account of the entire litigation and implementation process.
Gloppen
Siri
S
Department of Comparative Politics, University of Bergen, Norway. siri.gloppen@cmi.no
D003906:Developing Countries; D014943:Global Health; D006297:Health Services Accessibility; D054625:Healthcare Disparities; D006806:Human Rights / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D011203:Poverty; D011635:Public Health Administration / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000379:methods*; D012962:Sociology, Medical