Back come to my memory, among other, the so many defeats I have lived through with so many others where and when things went sour for us tireless activists struggling for a fairer world. To name just a few: The Voluntary Guidelines on the Right to Food and those on Food Systems, the Food Systems Summit, reforming the CFS in FAO, the introduction of COVID at the Committee on Food Security in FAO, the Binding Treaty on TNCs and human rights being painfully negotiated for six years at the Human Rights Council, the UN’s Global Compact, WHO’s FENSA, the SUN Initiative, One Nutrition, COVAX, ETOs, the COVID waiver at WTO, 26 COPs since the Rio Earth Summit in 1992… on-and-on

By Claudio Schuftan

Freelance Public Health Consultant and Human Rights Activist  

Co-founding member of the People’s Health Movement

Ho Chi Minh City,  schuftan@gmail.com

Frustrations of a Lifelong Global Issues Activist

 

Frustrations brood, but they also make us rethink. Here I want to zero-in on the challenges we in social movements (have) chronically face(d) in relation to so unsuccessfully having tackled and continue to tackle global governance issues. The story of our lives has so often become a string of disappointments making us sometimes wonder: Are we made a laughing stock? Are we fooling ourselves that ‘things are going to be alright’? or Do we need to work in a totally different way given that the private sector has pushed our backs totally against the wall in rooms where governance issues are decided? Are smart young people going to pick up the challenges as we, old people, are going to phase out pretty soon?

Bringing relevant issues to mind (needed elements for a cool-headed analysis)

As public interest civil society organizations (PICSOs)(i) and social movements, we forever seek meaningful participation in global fora –beyond voice– in an effort to influence and strengthen the decisions that can lead to lasting legally binding changes. How many times, at what is left of true multilateral venues, do we find ourselves defending already earlier agreed language when we are ultimately most often ignored, for instance, at open-ended working group (OEWG) discussions at UN agencies? But, we keep trying, and..?:  …“I participate. You participate. He/she participates. We participate. but… They decide”. (chalkboard in Bolivia)

(i): I do recognize that some PICSOs are also part of the problem and act, not in the interest of their constituencies, and take the side of international NGOs and of rich member states, i.e., many PICSOs have bought-in into public private partnerships (PPPs) and multistakeholder platforms –take the UN’s Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) initiative as an example that has attracted PICSOs. [PICSOs are to be distinguished from PINGOS and BINGOs (Private and Business Interest NGOs and front groups). BINGOs are, among other, backed by big powerful often Gates-funded international NGOs like Save the Children, Helen Keller, ILSI … ) who are brought in to implement and monitor UN resolutions].

So, we have to ask ourselves: When is PICSOs participation in these venues an instrument to manipulate us? I believe some opportunities-still-open are given us simply to give the illusion of genuine consultation/inclusivity –or to use the SUN Initiative’s depicting this as a true ‘dialogue’. They forget to tell us that the same opportunities are given to BINGOs(ii) who, from a position of much greater power, have learned how to word and position their interventions to serve their and their stockholders’ narrow interests. The language they use is now so deceptive that too few are able to tell that it is all a smokescreen. (Keep in mind here: New opportunities to better participate is not what we are ultimately striving for; we are striving for on-the-ground results). For that, therefore, are we truly challenging the dominant narratives by truly bringing people’s experiences, evidence and apprehensions into the global negotiation space? I would say no; we are rather banging our heads against multiple walls –one after the other… Are we thus wasting our time? How many more boils and bruises can we take? The sad truth is that, if we are not there yet, the omnipresent global controlling forces can shamelessly go right ahead with no worries.(ii)  …There is much here to dispassionately rethink so as to profoundly review the way we operate.(iii)

(ii): Final decisions that, as PICSOs we try to influence, too often clash with the call for consensus resolutions by UN member states. Appallingly, what comes out are mostly non-binding resolutions (that may be norm-setting making them sometimes of some relevance). Consensus resolutions are not a written rule in the UN system though. In some decision-making processes in UN agencies, rulings are arrived-at by voting. In reality, the rules for processes of negotiation of UN resolutions are only in theory ‘democratic’ though, i.e., when resolutions are voted, each member state has voice and can abstain or oppose the adoption of a given instrument or resolution. On the other hand, when important resolutions are adopted by consensus, it is because the member states ‘convey that they have the political will to work by consensus’ (it remains to be proven that this is by genuine choice or by pressure reflecting an international system captured by those countries rendered rich). Only in counted processes is consensus approval less controversially chosen, because the negotiating parties have no real big differences with regards to what is being negotiated.

(iii): Progressive movements work best when the ground is laid by, across-the-board– raising their political consciousness …and this takes a long time and much effort, as well as funding, lots of it, and fast. A question we can no longer ignore thus is: Where can progressives get the funding needed for this?  And no less important: Are any groups in place ready to do this consciousness raising? Certainly a huge job.

Because we have historically failed on the politicization front, corporations and allied governments are, again and again, going to easily outmaneuver us. We are literally decades behind. It is our well-founded disappointment that has to lead us into possible new approaches. My point of departure is the fact that money talks. The drivers of global governance have access to enormous and growing resources –and wealth concentration continues to accelerate upwards dramatically– so that those rendered rich will find more and more ways to reduce regulations that hamper their booming businesses. Do I see any promising way forward to make up for this? Being a pessimist-optimist, yes, I do.

More often than not, the above reasons have historically relegated PICSOs’ and social movements’ positions and demands to the dust bin, i.e., member states’ consensus resolutions ignore PICSOs’ well-reasoned inputs so that, at the end, these inputs end up making little or no difference: a pre-desired consensus with softened language is hammered out at the we-hours of the night only to see that, then, the resolutions are not applied at national level where political powers keep things under (their) control. As a response, we may as well demand voting so that minority positions be accepted and tabled! We probably could count on a small number of member states going along with us on this. Make no mistake: what we are talking about here is about the need to demand the overruling of anachronic procedures and rules so as to genuinely democratize UN agencies.

But it is not just about the procedures and rules in UN fora. Probably, an entire new UN reshape is needed. Discussions do exist about this. But they are so far dominated by academics, think tanks, international NGOs and former UN officials. Grassroots social movements have hardly taken up this question; no good reason for it. Basically, it is not about coming up with brilliant new ideas. It is about building up political forces from the ground pushing for the democratization of this absolutely key international body. At this moment, we do not have the right governments, parties, UN officials to bring about and materialize such a vision; much work is ahead here. Moreover, democratizing the UN has to go hand-in-hand with addressing power imbalances among countries and with reclaiming democracy from below. Otherwise it will lead to just more tinkering with pat solutions.

It is pertinent and very important here to remember that, since its creation, the UN has been based on two fundamental principles, namely member states’ sovereignty and polycentrism.(iv)

(iv): Polycentrism in the UN development system gives member states the global voice promised in the organization’s founding Charter. (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&q=polycentrism+in+the+UN) Polycentrism is key for building a more egalitarian international order. It is thus a must for member states, particularly in the South, to resurrect this concept and use it as a central revindication banner to build an international order based on true cooperation and respect of their sovereignty, i.e., to defend the UN obligation for states to negotiate as equals. The UN simply must serve as a platform in which all states sit around the table and negotiate the different aspects of, for example (but not only), the SDGs as equals. As can be easily seen, polycentrism is the antithesis of the way the current (and past) international system works based on the law of the most powerful, on a frantic competition between nations and on the primacy of national as opposed global collective interests. Terms are imposed rather than negotiated, therefore protecting/advancing the interests of the great powers and of the international financial institutions –all against the solemn UN principles.

Additionally, at the base of our frustrations is the fact that time has allowed corporations to creep-in to advance their positions through public-private partnerships, within and outside the UN, allowing them to act with impunity so that the power of special interests ends up being far greater than that of the member states and of public interest civil society.

Yes, multilateralism is under attack by corporate capture. Despite our significant and well-reasoned contestations and our resistance to these developments over the past decades, these accumulated trends have culminated in a privatized multistakeholder space we need to forcefully denounce and dispute, simply because financial and transnational  corporations are dominating the agenda laying out a joint UN-corporate roadmap (not only cherry-picking areas of involvement, i.e., those most profitable to them, but also involving ‘socializing’ risks and privatizing profits. They have learned to use hypocrisy…).  What, of course, comes to mind here are developments at the World Economic Forum (take their ‘Great Reset’ Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Reset ) and the travesty we observed in the 2021 UN Food System’s Summit with its disregard for the fundamental changes needed for the right to food, to food sovereignty and to agroecology to be respected, among other. Also, Codex Alimentarius boasts about its care for malnourished children and the importance of a fair global trade yet the PICSOs involved in it have a real struggle to get effective safeguards into the texts under discussion –industry dominates the field.

When discussing human rights issues in so many relevant UN and other international fora, country delegations from the Global South are poorly informed and poorly staffed so that they often ‘flow with the Joneses’ as if they do not realize or care when things, the way they are going, clearly go against their national interest. PICSOs are much better informed and prepared than, I would say, 2/3 of the member states’ delegations. But we cannot forget that most PICSOs and individual activists:

a) have pitifully scarce financial and human resources and, unless sufficiently coordinated, achieve only limited synergy –in reality, many are still fragmented and siloed (and thus weak)(v), on top of being vulnerable to problematic offers of funding for technical interventions (some of them good and important, admittedly). But this is at the root of why they fail to see the bigger picture and realize how they are being used to usher-in PPPs that make them loose their independence.

b) are facing shrinking operational spaces and perhaps a reduced ambition to stand up for human rights in a commensurate way.

(v): To make sense of current world problems, we too often fall back on a ‘shish-kebab mentality’. This much easier and convenient approach looks at the various problems affecting the world as if they were all separate events skewed together by tragedy or destiny. So, we set out to tackle each individual morsel …when the problem is in the skewer, i.e., in the structural determinants or, if you wish, the common systemic drivers of the problems behind each morsel. These are linked to the prevailing neoliberal system that is at the very core of each of the morsels. But the point is: We have to focus on changing the skewer to radically change the morsels. So, the morsels have to first come together as a collective rather than letting themselves be pinched up individually on the skewer. (Important note: Also applies to vegetarian kebabs…).

Furthermore, consider these four arguments

a) To keep calling for convergence, coordination and coherence is but a pipe dream. It is like, as we so often have done before, calling for ‘more multidisciplinarity’.(vi)

(vi): There is nothing terribly wrong with this concept, but it just gratuitously assumes that looking at the problem behind these issues from a ‘wider’ multi-professional perspective is going to automatically lead us to the better, more rational and egalitarian solutions… Just by putting together brains ‘sowed’ differently, without considering where they are coming from ideologically, is not going to, all of a sudden, make a significant difference in the outcome and the options that will be chosen. Most proponents of a convergence fall into the same game. They call for putting a stop to groups acting in silos and…converge. Bottom line, true convergence is not to be just an intellectual process. To be effective, it has to lead to a convergence of motivations and energies directed towards the organization of politically driven movements. (I do recognize that there are some who understand the call for convergence rather in terms of ‘grassroots struggles of the world, unite!’. But are they not a minority?).

b) The core issue we are dealing with is a push and/or a pull question. Nothing much will come from (UN) reforms being pushed from above. Only active organized claim holders unrelenting ‘pulling’ for needed changes will move the process ahead. History is clear about this.(vii)

(vii): Where to ‘pull’? Michael Fakhri (the UN’s Special Rapporteur) reminded us that ‘PICSOs coming to the table to discuss better, global solutions’ is not as simple as it sounds, especially if the table is already set, the seating plan non-negotiable and the menu highly limited. …And what if the real conversation is actually happening at a different table?

c) Looking-at and ensuring the progressive realization of human rights is an activity terribly neglected. (Is it perhaps because human rights are not understandable or too abstract to the average claim holders?). Add to this the poorly functioning accountability mechanisms being applied by PICSOs-acting-as-watchdogs (Again, do claim holders really understand what human rights accountability means?).(viii)

(viii): Watchdogs are a man’s best friend: dogs bite. So, what this calls for is more watchdog civil society organizations that are to watch like ‘white knights fighting the dark forces of development aid, corruption and incompetence’. The watchdog function being of utmost importance, we need to become much better at shedding light into darkness by exposing much more what goes wrong.  As said, PICSOs have a crucial role in monitoring the progress, stagnation or regression made in the progressive realization of long-term plans (10 years) to fulfill the right to health, to nutrition, to education… Annual benchmarks of processes-set-in-motion (or not) have to be set so that these PICSOs can assess, to repeat, progress, stagnation or retrogression on an annual basis with something akin to widely disseminated shadow reports.

d) And then there is all this signing of letters of complaint and this writing of declarations and the reading of statements at UN meetings we all so (too) often engage in. Yes, they may make us feel better, but how much do they help? Do we follow up on them? To make a difference, we need to get where it really hurts –and not all PICSOs are happy to go this far; they may make nice gestures, but then hold back. ‘Well done is better than well said’ Benjamin Franklin told us.(ix)

(ix): The lessons to be learned here can best be found with the trade unions that started organizing themselves over a hundred years ago, locally, nationally, globally, not always with equal success. But, to this day, they remain the only credible organizations that can negotiate, that can enforce something –that can bring about true counter-power. (I note that boycotts also have real potential power). Nothing is going to come from ‘the government or the state or the international community should’. World Bank Reports are full of these ‘shoulds’(!) and look where that has taken us. Assessing claim holders’ capacity to demand is thus part of the broader challenge to rectify their chronic inertia. In short, any call must be coupled with human rights learning at the bases so as to help/contribute to empower claim holders to demand the needed changes themselves. Otherwise, our calls will become yet more wish letters to Santa Claus.  [A relevant aside here: what is this animal ‘the international community’? There is no such a thing as the international community; we must take it out of our vocabulary. There is no global obligation for the international community to root out poverty so that the presence of poverty can be considered as a dereliction of duty towards the SDGs.

So far, the international community has failed to organize a credible system of global re-distribution (disparity reduction) so it can be objectively regarded as a violator of the goal on poverty in the SDGs charade. This ‘international community’ will not move effectively in solidarity against poverty and other human rights violations until the neoliberal global restructuring that Globalization has mounted is modified by an ethics about which the proponents of Globalization continue to be terribly ambivalent or choose to turn a blind eye on. Unacceptable passivity has characterized the attitude of the international community in embarking in decisive human rights work. Worldwide coordination among all social movements that support the human rights-based framework is thus the crucial challenge: forget the international community].

What I think needs, among other, to be done:

[Actions suggested here to address the deplorable current situation are brief to the point of caricatures; they are presented in no particular order of priority and, let it be said, I am not as pretentious to think I have the package of actions to follow –they are rather terribly prescriptive and normative at that].

• Accept no more promises without concrete measures that can be legally enforced and monitored. Accept no more discrepancy between principles and practice.
• Not only (more) political analyses are needed, but also (more) political action. Action is actually needed on a scale that is mainly only contemplated and voiced by those not sitting at the various decision-making tables.
• If we want to achieve something more, redouble our organization, further strengthen our structures and mentor more able spokespersons, especially young activists.
• Having well hammered-out goals and objectives is not enough. In the end, they are only aspirations. Without commensurate and matching policies that lead to legally enforceable measures, they are of no interest to the fulfilment of human rights; only policies that set plausible pathways point to credible destinations.
• Increase PICSOs mobilization around the shish kebab concept. Only this will build the needed ground resistance to change things sustainably. For this, claim holders must get inside traditionally closed or uninvited spaces…
• We say we have to convince more member state delegates at UN venues (often diplomat-bureaucrats). But decisions are taken in capitals –mostly in foreign affairs ministries. So, capitals is where our pressure ought to be exerted.
• Sympathetic champions within UN and other international agencies are key assets: seek, nurture and encourage them.
• Actively work with sympathetic governments willing to be vocal in international fora partnering with PICSOs in our demands (these demands ultimately clearly benefiting them).
• Critically question and, as needed, oppose the processes and governance guidelines and procedures of the UN (other than the General Assembly’s one-country-one vote) proposing new, more democratic ones.
• A procedural change must be kept as a preferred option to move away from passing resolutions by consensus, i.e., allowing for member states’ voting and eventually for minority reports in the several and fragmented UN governance spaces. (This said, I do not underestimate the need for an overall new direction of where the UN should go).
• Add to these a) contesting the deceiving language in use: no more stakeholders, no more loosely defined partnerships (among unequals), no more non-state actors, no more international community, no more mutual accountability…, and b) be careful not to compromise when, so often –in a mockery of democratic decision-making– we are asked for comments on ‘zero’ or advanced drafts of UN documents.
• Many small struggles are to coalesce. Among other, this means engaging with academics, trade unions and with youth and women’s organizations –emulating the climate movement and their effective denunciation, e.g., the Fridays For Future movement and Greta’s Blah! Blah! Blah!, and last but not least
• Broaden our alliances and engagement with the different UN mandate holders (including rapporteurs) and with the South Center in Geneva.(x)

(x): The South Center was created by Mwalimu Nyerere as a think tank of and for the countries of the South. Its positions have, more often than not, been congruent with those of PICSOs. Over the years, it has become influential in many capitals around the world. Working with and through them has the potential of reaching member states with an authoritative and prestigious voice.

Bottom line

Can we work towards building a people’s governance grounded in multilateralism and human rights? For this, the answer may or may not be a new more radical way of engagement(xi) with, for example, the Committee on Food Security (CFS) at FAO, where PICSOs and social movements still have a nominal presence. If this fails, PICSOs and social and indigenous people’s movements in the Civil Society Mechanism (CSM) of the CFS must ponder the alternative to leave the CFS moving their demands to other stages with a greater potential to influence governance decisions that break away from the neoliberal chokehold). I recognize we are not there yet. Grassroots social movements are not giving priority to this question yet. So, for now, we should stay in places like the CFS to do precisely this: become biting watchdogs and continue demanding conditions we want to see in place. In that sense, it is more about resisting, about ‘throwing sticks to the wheels’.

(xi): The example of the People’s Health Movement’s ‘WHO Watch’ active in the World Health Assembly (and its Executive Board meetings) every year adds an important action point suggestion here. Activists go through the agenda of each of these meetings weeks in advance and prepare a one or two pager briefing document that, on the top half page, objectively summarizes the key issues under discussion. Then, in a paragraph or two, PHM says which points it agrees with. Underneath, the points of disagreement are summarized with clear justification from a PICSO’s perspective. This is followed by calls for changes to be made in the texts under discussion –not necessarily exhaustively in this short briefing document, but clearly addressing ‘pink lines’ that are of great concern to civil society. The document is then distributed to all member state representatives attending and used for the advocacy PHM volunteers do ‘in the corridors’ in-situ. This has proven effective to provide arguments when member state delegates make use of the floor. [Note that in the case of hybrid meetings, the document can be emailed to Geneva or Rome country Delegations].

[Some concepts were taken from the CSM and Indigenous Peoples’ document ‘Towards a Strategy on Global Food Governance’. Otherwise, I acknowledge the generous inputs of Nora Mckeon, Sofia Monsalve, Raffaele Morgantini, Patti Rundall, Ted Greiner].

On a more facetious note:

En un café de Madrid escuché esta conversación, que mostraba un gran pesimismo, pero ningún dramatismo:

Uno de los contertulios le decía a otro:

-A mi, lo que más me gusta es perder a las barajas.

-¿Pero es que no te gusta ganar?

-¡Coño! ¿se puede?   (you can googletranslate this)

Postscript

It takes courage to stand up for the things we do at this moment of history. We believe in human rights, we pretend to represent the interests of people and countries rendered poor and receiving pittances in ‘development aid’. And we hope that slowly slowly the world will become a better place to live in, if only member states of the Global South were able to acknowledge that they too have a responsibility and much to lose, that there should be no corruption, that democracy is important, that the emission of greenhouse gases has to be reduced… We want to believe it. But we know it is not reality. Are we achieving what we stand for (fighting poverty, injustice, inequality, climate change, human rights violations)? I mean, are we really?  Of course not. What are we saying and what needs to be done? Who are ‘we’ and who stands with us? Who is listening? We can and do dream; is it the only thing left to us? We continue to believe in a different world, for the generations of today and tomorrow. We try to follow what happens in this world, from a human rights and social justice point of view —in spite of all of today’s gloom. We have to continue to fight for a better world, but are there better ways? (adapted from Francine Mestrum)

Some out-of-the-box ideas

We have to make it our mission to gain full access to the table wherever food governance decisions are being made –beyond the CFS. This has some tactical implications to work-on (the how and the who…and the against whom).

Even more out-of-the-box here: Can we start a campaign for a WHO Committee on Health Security and for a UNICEF Committee on Child Security? Not that we are going to win, but just to raise some eyebrows and eventually gain some momentum (no reason why FAO yes and the others no).

Fight for the approval and funding of a global HR Learning campaign organized by PICSOs, both for duty bearers and for claim holders. This is based on acknowledging that we have little clout, because too many DBs do not know the obligations they are bound-under and CHs do not know the powers HR entitles them to use in organizing, mobilizing and demanding their rights. This will put a lot of responsibility on our shoulders to come up with appropriate curricula and capabilities to participate in these trainings the world over. (We do not have to reinvent the wheel; lots already there).

Make it a point that the Sp Rapp for F+N is on the table at the highest food governance bodies with voice and (minority?) vote!

Make sure genuine reps of social movements/PICSOs are nominated to ‘join the table’ and hold periodic trainings for them to unify criteria of what to fight for as priorities (includes setting red lines).

Even more out-of-the-box here: Ask our lawyer comrades if and how we can sue UN bodies (in HR courts: Europe, other?) for failing to discharge their responsibility of forcefully enough reaffirming the duty of states and of international cooperation as per their respective mandates and UN Charter that obliges them to carry out that duty to realize the RTF and other rights.  (Includes these bodies creating an enabling environment through the allocation of sufficient resources –human and other). This may well end up in a dead end, but has PR and visibility value. (This is not about People’s Tribunals which is another alternative)

This article precedes a research paper that will be published in 2024.  For further information on Children that accompany a parent Prison, or the health of older people in prison, contact the author using the details at the end of this article 

The prison system, while serving a vital role in society by ensuring public safety and holding individuals accountable for their actions, often comes at a cost to those directly and indirectly affected by it. Two distinct sub-groups within the prison population – children who accompany their parents in prison and older inmates – are routinely denied access to basic human rights, particularly in the areas of early years education and healthcare. This article delves into these injustices, highlighting the need for urgent action and systemic reform

By Philip J Gover BA MA MPH

Public Health Consultant, Cooperation Works

Who Suffers Most:  The Visibility of Children and Older People in Prison

 

Children in Prison: Denied a Fundamental Right

Children who accompany a parent (routinely the mother) in prison are essentially the innocent victims of circumstance, yet they face a multitude of challenges that can have lasting consequences on their personal development. One of the most significant is the lack of access to early years education. These crucial years, from birth to age five, are critical for building a strong foundation in cognitive, social, and emotional development. Yet, children in prison settings are often excluded from early childhood education programs, depriving them of the opportunity to learn, play, and interact with their peers in a stimulating environment.  For those invisible children who live their life on the inside, the formative years of development are being wasted.

The Consequences of Educational Deprivation

The lack of early years education can have severe consequences for children in prison. Studies have shown that children who are deprived of educational opportunities are more likely to experience developmental delays, behavioural problems, and academic difficulties later in life. They may also struggle to build healthy relationships and integrate into society upon release. This can create a cycle of disadvantage, perpetuating the same issues that led to their parents’ incarceration.

Investing in early years education for children in prison is not just a moral obligation; it’s an economic imperative. By providing these children with the support and resources they need to thrive, we can help break some of the elements that contribute to the cycle of poverty and crime, and promote safer and more prosperous futures for more.

Addressing the Healthcare Needs of Older Prisoners

As the global prison population ages, the number of older inmates is also on the rise. This demographic faces unique challenges, including increased vulnerability to poor health, mobility issues, and chronic diseases. In overcrowded prisons, the consequences are multiplied.  Yet, healthcare services within prison settings are often inadequate, lacking the resources and expertise to meet the specific needs of older inmates. In other corners of the world, these services are absent.  This lack of appropriate care can result in needless suffering and long term increases in healthcare costs for society as a whole.  At worst, the consequences can lead to preventable premature death.  Like metrics associated with excess Winter deaths and heat implicated mortality, we need to pay more attention to premature and preventable prison-based mortality.

The Human Rights Dimension

Both the denial of early years education for children in prison and the neglect of healthcare for older inmates raise serious human rights concerns. These individuals are entitled to the same basic rights as everyone else, including access to education and healthcare. Yet, the prison system often fails to uphold these rights, creating a system of inequality and injustice.  

The Need for Systemic Change

To ensure that all individuals within the prison system have access to their fundamental rights, systemic change is needed. This includes:

• Investing in early years education programs for children in prison. This would involve providing early years learning systems, qualified educators, age-appropriate materials, and safe creative space in which to learn.
• Improving healthcare services for all prison populations is essential, but for older prisoners, it is critical. This would require increasing funding, recruiting and training specialized healthcare professionals, and implementing age-appropriate care plans.
• Ratifying and implementing international human rights treaties that guarantee the rights of prisoners. This would provide a legal framework for ensuring that all prisoners are treated with dignity and respect.
• Promoting public awareness and understanding of the unique challenges faced by children in prison and older inmates. This would help generate support for reform efforts and create a more compassionate and humane prison system.

Conclusion 

The denial of early years education for children in prison and the neglect of healthcare among older inmates are unacceptable injustices that demand immediate attention. By advocating for systemic change, investing in essential programs and upholding human rights principles, we can create a prison system that is more just, equitable, and humane for all. The well-being of these vulnerable populations is not just a moral imperative, but a crucial step towards building a more inclusive and sustainable future for all.

At Cooperation Works, we see transformational opportunities for those that direct prison systems to play a more proactive role.  Prisons can become beacons of education, health, wellbeing and rehabilitation if the political will is present. If we want public health to gain more traction in society and deliver the widespread benefits that we know it can, it is likely to be within a settings approach that can provide the most utility and value.

Public health is a shared responsibility with the determinants of inequality to be found in every corner of society. Prisons are both homes, workplaces and learning environments, but inadequate attention is being given to prison-based education and healthcare.  If equality have any place in the future of our society, we could do no worse than prioritising and focusing our efforts on health and educational improvements in prison settings.

About 

This article precedes a research paper that will be published in 2024.  For further information on Children that accompany a parent Prison, or the health of older people in prison, contact the author using the details below.

Philip J Gover is a Community & Public Health Consultant, based in SE Asia.  A frequent speaker at subject specific conferences, his expertise lies in leveraging creativity, innovation and incentives to build transformational systems that reduce poverty and inequality.  With an approach rooted in community development and underpinned by the lived experience of members, Philip embraces and promotes adult education, lifelong learning and shared knowledge.

For collaborative conversations, contact philip.gover@cooperation.works 

 

The recent pandemic Covid-19 has left a big impact on to our lives. It has not only added some painful memories, but at the same time, it has left us with some beneficial factors that could not have been achieved over centuries. The time has come to analyse those positive effects that revolutionized some very important environmental laws in force. The forced Lockdown period not only restored the balance within the ecosystem, thereby reducing emission of Green House Gases (GHGs) as also reducing the requirement for electricity consumption but at the same time, it brought peace and tranquillity not known for many decades. Thus, Air Pollution came to a standstill, so also water reached its significant level of purity and unwanted use of noise never ran the show. On the other hand, the rampant burial of corpses, and the haphazard disposal of PPEs in the form of gloves and masks brought with in itself the risks of increased Bio-medical Hazard. Thus, the Environment was at the pity of our hands, of how to use it. This stirred and shocked the whole nation, with the environmentalists trying to bring in some tangible reforms. Environmental Law which subsist on the Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change (MoEFCC), Central as well State Pollution Control Boards has in in its ambit The Wildlife Protection act 1972, The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, The Environment (Protection) Act 1986, The Public Liability Insurance Act 1991 (later amended in 1992), The National Environment Appellate Authority Act 1997, The Energy Conservation Act 2001,  Biological Diversity Act 2002, Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights ) Act 2006 , The National Green Tribunal  Act, 2010, Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016 respectively. With the onslaught of such an imminent Disaster, the Country came up with a Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Notification 2020 by the MoEFCC and another was on Coal Mining. Concern started brewing as none of them were without public dialogue and was a drastic decision on the part of the Government. They brought in Ordinances, Notifications as well as Guidelines during this time period of Complete Shutdown.

In this paper, the author seeks to analyse how these new Environmental Laws will impact our Environment over a period of time and similarly the Human Mankind accordingly. It is high time that we all arise and voice our concerns as to the need of the merits and the demerits of such Legislations.

By Dr Tanushree Mondal

Associate Professor and Student of LLB Course, Kingston Law College

West Bengal, India

The Effects of the Onslaught of COVID-19 and its Impact on the Environmental Laws

 

 

INTRODUCTION

The World witnessed the outbreak of COVID-19 at the end of December 2019, from the Hunan seafood market in Wuhan City of China, and over time, the World Health Organization declared it as an international public health emergency. ¹ As of September 06, 2020, the virus spread to 216 countries, with the death toll of 876, 616 humans from 26,763,217 confirmed cases ¹. This virus mainly spread through person-to-person via direct contact or droplets produced by coughing, sneezing and talking ^2,3,4. To control the spread of this virus and in order to reduce the death rate, Government of most of the affected countries as well India restricted the movement of its people and promoted the use of non-pharmaceutical measures like wearing face masks and hand gloves, washing hands with soap, frequent use of antiseptic solution and maintaining social distance. To reduce further spread, all the public transport services (e.g., bus, truck, train, aeroplanes etc.) were suspended, with exceptions of the transportation of essential goods and emergency services ⁵. The World Economic Forum reported nearly 3 billion people were faced with some form of lockdown globally on April 7th, 2020.

COVID-19 AND ITS POSITIVE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT

With the advent of lockdown, industries, transportation and companies were closed down, that brought in a sudden drop of greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions. Emission of NO₂ is one of the key indicators of global economic activities, and during that period, data revealed a sign of reduction in many countries (e.g., US, Canada, China, India, Italy, Brazil etc.) due to the recent shut down. ^6,7,8,9

Overall, low consumption of fossil fuels in locomotives as well as in industries reduced the emission of GHGs, thereby helping to deal efficiently against global climate change. Oil demand dropped to 435,000 barrels globally in the first few months of 2020, compared to the same period of the last year ¹⁰. Likewise, the global coal consumption reduced to 26% in India with 19% reduction of total power generation following lockdown¹¹.

Since the major industrial sources of pollution reduced or completely stopped, it brought down the pollution load ¹². Rivers Ganga and Yamuna, reached a significant level of purity due to the absence of industrial pollution during lockdown in India. It was found that, water in 27 out of the 36 real-time monitoring stations of river Ganga, met the permissible limit which in itself was a remarkable finding to us. ¹³So also, there was improvement of water quality at Haridwar and Rishikesh respectively and reduction of almost 500% of sewage and industrial effluents ⁹,¹³.

So also, the noise pollution reduced. The noise level of the capital city of India, drastically reduced to around 40–50% during the lock‐down period ⁹. As a result of the reduction of vehicle movement during that period, the noise levels of Govindpuri metro station in Delhi reduced to 50–60 dB, from 100 dB ¹⁴. Central Pollution Control Board ¹⁵ of India stated that, noise level of residential area of Delhi reduced from 55 dB (daytime) and from 45 dB (night) to 40dB (daytime) and 30 dB (night) respectively.

Thus, the pandemic has caused huge global socio-economic imbalance, that affected directly as well as indirectly the environment such as improvement of air and water quality, reduction of noise and restoration of ecology ^8.9.

DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS OF COVID-19 ON THE ENVIRONMENT

On the other hand, since the outbreak of COVID-19, bio-medical waste generation increased immensely, posing a major threat to public health and environment. For example, in Ahmedabad, the amount of medical waste generation increased from 550-600 kg/day to around 1000 kg/day during lockdown ⁹. Bio-Medical Waste generated from the hospitals in the form of needles, syringes, bandage, mask, gloves, used tissue, and discarded medicines etc. was not managed properly, which posed a matter of concern globally. Such dumping of wastes indiscriminately clogs the water ways and worsens environmental pollution ^16,17. Usually, Polypropylene used to make N-95 masks, and Tyvek for gloves persists for a long period and releases toxins like dioxin to the environment ¹⁶. So also, huge number of disinfectants applied to roads, commercial, and residential areas to curb SARS-CoV-2 virus kills beneficial species, creating ecological imbalance ¹⁸.

Here, there is something to be mentioned about the conditions that prevailed over a Burial Ghat ¹⁹ on the banks of River Ganges in Prayagraj in UP. Several corpses were buried by their near and dear ones who succumbed to death as a result of the deadly Epidemic. They dug a shallow grave and covered them with sand. and as a result of which, increased the chances of Water Pollution, thereby disrupting not only the aquatic Flora and the fauna there, but at the same time, challenged that the bodies would be all over everywhere once the monsoons arrived and the sand was flooded by the river Ganges. The local Councillors assured to make use of JCB machines to dig deeper graves to bury them further down as the corpses were old and in such bad condition that it hardly can be handled or shifted. Thus, it is still a Mystery that much water has flown by, but what really happened to Prayagraj following Covid -19?

As a result of restriction of movement thereby slowing of socio-economic activities, improvement of air quality took place with a reduction in water pollution at the same time. Besides, increased generation of hospital wastes (e.g., face mask, hand gloves etc.), disposal of them haphazardly, overcrowding of Burial spots affecting the aquatic flora and fauna had negative impacts on the environment.

In these circumstances, the study aims to explore both the merits and demerits of environmental consequences of COVID-19 pandemic, and how the new environmental Law 2020 Draft ²⁰ suddenly enforced by the Indian Government will affect the human life and the natural ecosystem in the future days to come.

It is well -known that most of the coal mining areas are situated in the dark forests of certain parts of Indian like Chattisgarh. It is also known that not all areas are open to Mining activities due to some reasonable restrictions posed by Law. Most of these forest areas are inhabited by Scheduled Tribes and to maintain sanctity, the Indian Laws have only permitted few such areas for Business Mining. With the introduction of the new EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment), many such restrictions have been withdrawn and is open for Coal Mining. This in itself is a hindrance and murder to the Natural Ecosystem, the indigenous Flora and the Fauna. So, it led way to Business corporates the permission to enter those Restricted zones at ease.

Many say, since the country was grieved with the Disaster on one hand, the Government took it as an opportunity to release the EIA so that resistance from the Public will be the Least as common people was waged with a war of Life vs. Death.

On the other hand, it was also felt that when people were struggling with their lives for the deadly disease that haunted us for three long years, The Indian Government was busy bringing such laws without the permission of the people of Indian, which is not in consonance with the Democratic rights of the people. This Act violated the Democratic nature of the Constitution of India which states By THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE, OF THE PEOPLE. Here, in this context, it is worth mentioning that, there is a law that, if any corporate body wants to trade in a restricted place, first it needs to have a dialogue with the indigenous people of that area. They should and must be on equal terms before allowing the other to venture in their land to do trade. This was heavily violated in this case of EIA.

As per the State of India’s Annual Environment Report 2023, shocking figures ²¹ are revealed regarding our Environment. Four Parameters have been used. Out of which the First and Foremost is the Environmental Performance is one such Key Parameter and the State of Telengana ranked First, however Nagaland, Rajasthan and Bihar ranked last. Telengana however, showed faltering figures in cases of Share of water bodies not in use, Stage of Ground water Extraction and in terms of Change in the number of Polluted River Stretches. In the Other Parameter, which is Agriculture, Madhya Pradesh ranked the Highest for the highest share of net value added and foodgrain production but it too was not free of loop-holes. Half the Crop Area in the state remains Un-insured. The Third Parameter was one of Public Health where Delhi ranked first due to maximum Budget allocated to health of this State and Healthcare facilities but failed in Low Immunisation Rates.  It was astonishing to find the State of Madhya Pradesh ranked low owing to High incidence of Maternal Mortality Ratio and Infant Mortality Rate still prevalent in this new era. Public Infrastructure and Human Development is the last Parameter, and Gujrat topped it for its performance in providing employment and increased Tap water Connections, however it ranked comparatively low in Sex Ratio and also in Rural households using unclean cooking fuels. It was astonishing how the State of Jharkhand ranked low along with a Tribal state, Nagaland. There were also key findings in 5 (Five) more salient areas.

In July 2022, India imposed banning of illegal use of plastics and anyone could lodge a complaint through a Mobile app called SUCPCB, but complaint rates were dismal. In 2021, India generated around 1,60,000 Tonnes of Municipal Solid Type Waste per day out of which 32 percent wastes were unaccounted for and is responsible for choking the water drains and are indiscriminately burnt. It is a shocking revelation in 2021, that the Average Life Expectancy in urban areas is shortened by 4 years and 11 months due to ever-increasing Air pollution. The people in the rural areas are worse affected with their life expectancy reduced by 5 years and 2 months. COPD (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease) is on the rise and thus Air pollution impacts badly on the human health. Same is the impact on Climate Disasters and on Extreme Weathers. In the year 2022, India experienced extreme weather events on 314 out of 365 days (86%) resulting in loss of 3,026 precious lives and damage to over 1.96 million hectares of crop area. Such calamities have impacted greatly on the Internal Displacement and Migration of the people. In the year 2022, India witnessed 100% of 2.51 million new displacements due to all such Disasters.

MEASURES TAKEN BY THE JUDICIARY TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT

In order to maintain a world with clean air, The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1981, or the Air Act came into force. Akin to air pollution, excessive noise is also considered to be a kind of pollutant of air as per Section 2(a) of The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1981. Similarly, the Water Prevention and Control of Pollution Act, 1974 was enforced in order to provide its citizens with clean drinking water and ensure proper maintenance of water bodies.

The Environment Impact Assessment Bill 2020 ²² (EIA) is a highly debatable ball game of the century. It is astonishing that when the whole world was gripped with the fear of Covid and India was a party to it due to the Impact, Indian Government brought in strange laws.

The EIA Draft was introduced to evaluate & also to estimate the impacts on environment and was first conceptualized in USA in the year 1979 which was later followed globally including India. It includes an Environmental Clearance in the form of a No Objection Certificate from the Central Ministry, State Department and locally from the Municipality or Board. Since 1994, such Environmental Clearance (EC) Certificate from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) was given only to those where Environmental norms or Food Security were not violated. EIA was later introduced in the Legislature in India in the year 1994. This was incorporated in order to strengthen or weaken a balance between the Environmental Growth as well as Industrial Development which is a difficult task in itself. Sometimes, this decides whether the Government took a beneficial move, or did a poor deal.  So, in a way it was just to strike a Balance between the Environmentalists and the Industrialists, or in other words, it led to a situation of Cost-Benefit Analysis. Several reforms were brought by the Policy makers in the following years.

In the year 1994, Government established an Environmental Impact agency (EIA) at the MoEFCC and made provisions to impose Penalty or Fine if they found any irregularity. Later in April 1997, Government introduced the system of “Public Hearing”, a chance given to the public for hearing as to the need of such Industries, thereby maintaining the sanctity of Democracy of the country.

However, in June 2002, Government cleared many High-Level Investment Projects without an EC. This is when the question of Dilution crept in. For example, a Construction of a mine can impact the environmental sustainability as well as lead to drastic major displacement and migration of the people. It is considered as an Industrialist Friendly Amendment. So, the industrialists celebrated at the irk of the environmentalists.

The next year in 2003 February, Government introduced more studies, research and inspection of project sites for better assessment. This attracted in more scrutiny which may lead to more disputes, Lawsuits and other consequences against the Industrialists. It was a mixed move by the Government, but In August 2003, The Government stated that any project in a highly polluted area and/ or within 15 km radius of a sensitive ecosystem/ protected area (National Park, Biosphere Reserve etc.) would require the EC and it came in the wake of the Biodiversity Act, 2002.

In September 2003, The Amendment that was brought by the Government was that “Public hearing is not required for activities that are taking places outside 10 km radius of any sensitive ecosystem or human habitation” which was in sharp contradiction to 2003 amendment. The Government introduced “Temporary working permit for 2 (Two) years without an EC from July 2005. This move emphasized taking pity and granting mercy even when the industry committed a Mistake Intentionally within a span of these 2 (two) years.

The New EIA 2006 notification was drafted following this with 4 (four) salient points and replaced the EIA 1994 notification subsequently. The 2006 Notification divided the Projects in 2(two) categories namely Category A that required EC from the Central Government and Category B that needed to receive their EC from the respective State Governments. Out of which, in B1 -EIA reports were to be made while B2 was Exempted from EIA Process. This actually allowed Discrimination to creep in. 2006 Draft was made on the basis of Size or Capacity of the project and not on the level of Investment that contradicted the June 2002 amendment. This reflected the Pro-Industrialist Move by the Government.  In this very amendment, public consultation was allowed only after EIA report was submitted. That was in fact, a fallacy adopted by the Government as once the EIA report is submitted, no changes can be made even if it was harmful to the nature or the local people. It just gave a Breathing space to the Industrialists but established that public opinion was not pivotal. Moreover, the funny part was that the Government never defined the term PUBLIC as what it exactly meant, either the general public or the Locals living around. Last but not the least, the Government Decentralized a lot of process to the State Government and reduced the time from 14- 28 months to 10-14 months alone. The amendments reflected how the policy -makers induced a tug of war between the environmentalists and the industrialists all through out.

Our key intention are the key points of Dispute or Concern with the New EIA 2020 Draft that came in during the Covid-19 Pandemic which will replace the 2006 Notification. It also covered 4 (Four) main points namely,

Post-facto approval

EC will be granted even if the construction has started or its in running phase- This means that the industries need not require a prior permission to start. This is in fact a very bold step on the part of the Government and a breach of trust of the common people.

Government does not want to halt Development plan or hurt the Economy which means that any environmental damage will be ignored and the culprit may get away by paying a fine which might not anywhere be close to the damages caused to the Environment.

Public Consultation Process

Time period for public to submit responses during public hearing is reduced from 30 days to 20 days. The introduction of this clause meant that Time which is an important essence for any public discourse and the endeavour of the Government is to wrap up as soon as possible to avoid the wrath and scepticism of the common people. Sometimes information as to the indigenous place is often not easily accessible and also there are barriers in language, and by reducing this time period, Government has tried to stifle the voice of the Nation.

Relaxation of monitoring requirements/ compliances

In 2006 Notification, compliance report is to be submitted for every 6 (six) months which helped in reality check but the 2020 Draft says Only ONCE a YEAR. – This will encourage unseen irreversible environmental and social consequences.

Gaming the system / loophole

Government’s categorization of a Project as “STRATEGIC” will be misused or creates a way to bypass the whole EIA process– This tells us that those projects will be stamped as Strategic, their details will not be shared in the public domain. The irony is that it will be the Government itself who will deem a Project to be Strategic and that this categorization is truly vague and violates the right of any citizen of India to procure any information as per the Right to Information Act, 2005. This act calls for a reduction of Transparency and credibility of the government as this is its own Brainchild and that it permits that if anyone violates the environmental laws, none can go against the Government.

Projects up to 1,50,000 square metres (previously it was 20,000 square metres) do not need “DETAILED SCRUTINY” by Expert Committee nor they need EIA studies or Public Consultation– This question of no scrutiny is like one clause bringing down all the other clauses in a Law down and is reflective of the poor judgement on the part of the Government.

IMPORTANT LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS/ CASE LAWS IN RELATION TO ENVIRONMENT

In this regard, few important Case Laws ²³ may be cited concerned with Environmental Law.

Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India ^[[1]^]

Related to: In this landmark case, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment in favour of Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum. Under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution Act, they had filed a Public Interest Litigation against the large-scale pollution to River Palar, which was the only source of drinking and bathing water for the local people. This pollution was caused due to the release of untreated wastes from the tanneries as well as other industries in Tamil Nadu. On top of that, it was found that nearly 35,000 hectares of agricultural land had become unfit for cultivation.

Held: The Supreme Court admitted that these Tanneries in India were the main foreign exchange earner providing employment to several thousands of people, yet due to environmental degradation, it directed all the Tanneries to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000 as fine.

1. C. Mehta v. Union of India ⁽Ganga River Pollution Case) ^[[2]^]

Related to: It was a PIL filed by the Mr. M. C. Mehta U/A 32 of Indian Constitution, where it was observed that water of River Ganga was highly toxic near Kanpur city because the Tanneries in the area were discharging untreated effluents and sludge into the river through nine nallahs. Even dead bodies and half-burnt bodies were also been thrown into the river indiscriminately thereby polluting the whole environment.

Held: The Supreme Court held “Just like an industry which cannot pay minimum wages to its workers cannot be allowed to exist, the tanneries which cannot set up a primary treatment plant cannot be permitted to continue “and observed that the contents of iron and manganese were much higher than the ISI limits of river water that made it harmful for consumption. Finally, the court held Kanpur Maha nagar palika liable. It also passed the following directions for the PCA (Prevention, Control and Abatement) Act, which were as follows:

• Increasing size of sewers in labour colonies;
• More numbers of latrines and urinals to be constructed;
• Preventing disposal of corpses and half-burnt bodies or ashes after Funeral ceremonies into the river indiscriminately;
• Installing treatment plants in all factories including tanneries;
• Observation of ‘Keeping the village clean week’
• Addition of Clips relating to importance and purity of water in the movie theatres at the time of intervals

Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board v. M. V. Nayadu ^[[3]^]

Related to : The respondents desired to establish an industry and so applied for issuance of Licence to the Commissioner of industries which meant that they had to fulfil certain essential criteria in order to obtain a certificate for Pollution control from the SPCB. Unfortunately, their appeal was rejected by A. P. PCB as it fell under “Red Category” and over that, the proposed site was within the radius of 102kms of 2 (two) lakes namely, the Himayat Sagar Lake and Osman Sagar Lake. Both were the primary sources of drinking water for Hyderabad and Secunderabad respectively. The Corporation further applied and was re-rejected on the same reason. Aggrieved respondents then moved before the Appellate Authority but the Respondents filed a PIL before High Court of Andhra Pradesh stating the order of APPCB to be baseless. Subsequently, APPCB went in appeal to Supreme Court against the orders of High Court under Article 136.

Held: The Supreme Court agreed to the appeal and agreed to the decisions of the APPCB for not granting the consent. The Court referred to landmark judgements in Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum case and Shri Ram Food and Fertilizers Gas Leakage case and held that the judges followed the Precautionary Principle and Polluter Pays Principle.

APPLICABILITY AND NON-APPLICABILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ACTS & POLICIES IN INDIAN ENVIRONMENTAL SCENARIO²⁴

So, we find that over the centuries the protector of the environment had been mired with the polluter of the environment. In most of the cases, courts issued directions to fill the yawning gaps in the existing law in order to strike a healthy balance. However, loopholes exist and that is the tragedy of this situation. Many a times, the Courts have issued directions to the local bodies, especially municipal authorities and statutory authorities reminding them of their responsibility to protect the environment, to remove the garbage and waste in order to keep the cities and towns clean. The Acts provided that the Officer responsible for the conduct of the business company would be held liable for offenses committed by the company. In order to run their businesses, the Multi-National Companies (MNCs) hire local people in different countries. The fallacy lies that, if they violate the law, it is the recruited staff who suffers and not the companies. It is also surprising, that the Acts fail to impose any liability when the MNCs fail to take the same safety measures, for installation of industries in our country, which they are bound to observe in their countries. Then where lies the power of the Legislature?

Thus, the quantum of liability imposed on a company by the anti-pollution legislations in India appear to be weak, less stringent and inadequate to bring the desired changes in their behaviour. They have shown an example of how badly they failed in their basic task of deterring such big enterprises from causing further harm and replenishing the damage caused to the environment.

On the other hand, the relevant provisions of Law provides that any member of the society can draw the attention of the Board on any matter relating to pollution of the environment, and for that it is necessary that 60-day time period should be given to the Board or Central Government before filing a complaint. In this time period, the offender of environmental pollution may destroy the evidence against it and escape its liability with minor or even no penalties at all. Thus, the provisions laid down by the anti-pollutions Acts are full with conflicting interests. These laws are actually pro-accused in nature as it prescribes different punishments for a similar offence and lays down that the benefit should go to the accused. Such a ridiculous step is enough to confuse the people of the Country as to whom they must rely upon.

The environment laws in India have laid down the provisions for the establishment of Pollution Control Boards (PCBs) to prosecute the accused. These boards are comprised of experts in this field and so are expected to carry out their tasks effectively. It is said what we Expect, the Government disposes. The appointment of such Experts depends upon the will of the government and, in reality, many unexperienced non-experts are inducted so as to facilitate these delinquents from getting adequate punishments. The boards are not free of political interferences and our expectations are far from reality. As a result, the Government plagues them so that they are not in a position to discharging their functions properly. The big shots Politicians are often afraid and reluctant to prosecute the MNCs from which huge tax revenues are earned and, therefore, escape the liability most of the times in the name of Economic development. The Bhopal Gas Tragedy is one such glaring example of it which brings out into focus the malady of our legal system that failed to stress on the mandatory need for an open EIA.

CONCLUSION

Thus, this paper concludes that, the new EIA Draft Notification is just an attempt to weaken the environmental regulations and to silence the affected community, to support the Industrialists and is akin to suspension of Fundamental Rights of all the citizens under Article 352 during National Emergencies. Our country did frame enough laws for regulation and protecting the environment, but unfortunately there are many loopholes in anti-pollution laws that need to be corrected for safeguarding the environment and the public interest.

 SUGGESTIONS

In the light of the above discussion, few suggestions are required to be made, which are as follows:

1. India being a Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic, Republic needs to consult its Public before making any move. Industries no doubt needs to be established for escalating a country’s economy, but it is also true that there must be a tri-partite dialogue between the Public, the Industrial Houses and the Policy makers. It though began with such a Model as we saw, but over time, this system withered and gave way to a Short-cut process in order to facilitate some big Merchant companies.
2. When the entire world is speaking about Global warming, loss of natural resources, it is high time the Environmental Laws are made more stringent, or otherwise it would have far-reaching impact on the existence of Human mankind on this earth. Without clean air to breathe, clean hygienic water to drink, and regularly faced with drastic environmental calamities all over the year, it truly is reducing the life span of humans over this earth and will do so more in the future days to come. Though it is an Uphill task of balancing natural conservation with economic development, the Courts as well as the Parliament must bring in Laws that are consistent with not only the survival of the humans, but also plants, animals and the aquatic flora and fauna without which the ecosystem is at fault.
3. The new EIA Draft 2020 has slackened the shackles of the policy makers and given the authority to the Industrialists. They are in a position to show disrespect to the ecosystem at the cost of filling their pockets. Sadly, the Government has left such loopholes from where the offenders can easily escape and make the common people a scapegoat. The people of India are left at the mercy of such a game by the rich and the powerful. Environment as well as the life of the locals now are at the mercy of the ruthless and there exists no mechanism to voice this injustice. In order to impart Justice in the present scenario, it is high time that the EIA Draft Bill never see the Light of the Day and the general public must protest against it. This can only be achieved through public awareness, Spreading Advocacy regarding protecting the Environment. It is the young generation who should bear the torch of a better future with a clean and safe and peaceful Earth.

 

REFERENCES

ARTICLES

1.WHO Rational use of personal protective equipment (PPE) for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) 2020.https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331498/WHO-2019-nCoV-IPCPPE_use-2020.2-eng.pdf

2. Islam S.M.D., Bodrud-Doza M., Khan R.M., Haque M.A., Mamun M.A. “Exploring COVID-19 stress and its factors In Bangladesh: a perception-based study” Heliyon. 2020;6(7) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3.Li Q., Guan X., Wu P., Wang X., Zhou L., Tong Y., Ren R., Leung K.S., Lau E.H., Wong J.Y. “Early transmission dynamics in Wuhan, China, of novel coronavirus–infected pneumonia. “N. Engl. J. Med. 2020 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [GoogleScholar]

4. Wang C., Pan R., Wan X., Tan Y., Xu L., Ho C.S., Ho R.C.” Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China.” Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health. 2020;17:1729. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Tripathi R. “India 21-day lockdown: what is exempted, what is not “ 2020.https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/india-21-day-lockdown-what-is-exempted-what-is-not/articleshow/74798725.cms
6. Biswal A., Singh T., Singh V., Ravindra K., Mor S. “COVID-19 lockdown and its impact on tropospheric NO concentrations over India using satellite-based data.”Heliyon. 2020;6 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Ghosh I. “The emissions impact of coronavirus lockdowns, as shown by satellites.” 2020.https://www.visualcapitalist.com/coronavirus-lockdowns-emissions/
8. Saadat S., Rawtani D., Mustansar C. Hussain “Environmental perspective of COVID-19.” Sci. Total Environ.2020;728:138870. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Somani M., Srivastava A.N., Gummadivalli S.K., Sharma A. “Indirect implications of COVID-19 towards sustainable environment: an investigation in Indian context.” Biores. Technol. Rep. 2020;11:100491. [Google Scholar]
10. IEA. “The International Energy Agency”; Paris, France: 2020. Oil Market Report: March2020.https://www.iea.org/reports/oil-market-report-march-2020 [Google Scholar]
11. CREA. “Air quality improvements due to COVID-19 lock-down in India. Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air.” 2020. https://energyandcleanair.org/air-quality-improvements-due-to-covid-19-lock-down-in-india/ 16 April, 2020.
12. Yunus A.P., Masago Y., Hijioka Y. “COVID-19 and surface water quality: improved lake water quality during the lockdown” Sci. Total Environ. 2020;731:139012. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Singhal S., Matto M. “COVID-19 lockdown: a ventilator for rivers. Down To Earth. In: Somani M.” editor. Vol. 11. 2020. p.100491.https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/covid-19-lockdown-aventilator-for-rivers-70771 (Bioresource Technology Reports). [Google Scholar]
14. Gandhiok J., Ibra M. “The Times of India; 2020. Covid-19: Noise Pollution Falls as Lockdown Rings in Sound of Silence.” https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/covid-19-noise-pollution-falls-as-lockdown-rings-in-sound-of-silence/articleshow/75309318.cms Apr 23, 2020. [Google Scholar]
15. CPCB. “Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India “;2020. Daily River Water Quality Monitoring Data. [Google Scholar]
16. Singh N., Tang Y., Ogunseitan O.A. “Environmentally sustainable management of used personal protective equipment.” Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Zambrano-Monserrate M.A., Ruanob M.A., Sanchez-Alcalde L. “Indirect effects of COVID-19 on the environment.” Sci.Total Environ. 2020;728:138813. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Islam S.M.D., Bhuiyan M.A.H. Impact scenarios of shrimp farming in coastal region of Bangladesh: an approach of an ecological model for sustainable management. Aquacult. Int. 2016;24(4):1163–1190. [Google Scholar

ONLINE SOURCES

19. https://youtu.be/k66XXNPRWiw?si=CRvOQB3nIjIl2Gx0
20. https://youtu.be/GroPZzPzYIA?si=K99MUBewvzcxwMBh
21. https://www.youtube.com/live/nmeYMF2pdVs?si=2rvsJbETAvcFDR1S
22. https://youtu.be/Uner_xD_hA4?si=6VSuCQTbRuPsi9eh
23. https://lawbhoomi.com/important-case-laws-of-environmental-law/
24. https://blog.ipleaders.in/lacunae-environmental-law/

ENDNOTES

[1] Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715: (1996) 5 SCC 647

[2]M. C. Mehta v. Union of India ⁽Ganga River Pollution Case) (1997) 2 SCC 353

[3] Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board v. M. V. Nayadu, AIR 1999SC 812: 2001 (2) SCC 62

Sharman Apt Russell turns the spotlight here on the history of food fortification in the United States, including that of iodine whose deficiency is known to cause goiter. 

Salt companies were pressured into putting iodine into salt. Now hardly anyone knows what iodine deficiency looks like -- same with scurvy and other diseases

By Sharman Apt Russell

 

Sharman Apt Russell has published some dozen books translated into nine languages. Her Diary of a Citizen Scientist won the 2016 John Burroughs Medal for Distinguished Natural History Writing and her Hunger: An Unnatural History (Basic Books, 2005) was written with the help of a Rockefeller Fellowship. Her Within Our Grasp: Childhood Malnutrition Worldwide and the Revolution Taking Place to End It (Pantheon Books, 2021) highlights the alignment of environmental and humanitarian goals.  Sharman lives in the magical realism of the American Southwest. She teaches in the MFA program of Antioch University in Los Angeles and is a professor emeritus at Western New Mexico University in Silver City. For more information, go to www.sharmanaptrussell.com

Snapshot of Food Fortification History in the United States

 

As a way to prevent and treat malnutrition, fortifying food with vitamins and minerals is fast, sustainable, cost-effective, and scalable. Like a lot of jargon, scalable is a term you first dislike and then find yourself using all the time. Scaling up iodine, scaling up iron, scaling up zinc. In a world of billions of people, we want good things to be scalable.

The United States is a compelling example of how food fortification can work.

Iodine is an element naturally low in some soils, leached out of flooded or glaciated areas. Our thyroid needs iodine to produce hormones, and a lack of iodine commonly causes a swelling of the neck’s thyroid gland, known as a goiter. You are tired. You feel cold. You gain weight. Tragically, you are pregnant, and your child suffers from a serious form of iodine deficiency called cretinism.

In 1820, a French chemist traveling through the “goiter belt” of America’s Great Lakes, Appalachian, and Northwestern regions suggested that table salt should be fortified with iodine, something the medical world discussed for the next hundred years. Finally, studies done on Ohio school girls from 1907-1919 proved that iodized salt could eliminate goiters. Some American salt companies embraced the idea as a public service. Others were moved by the threat of legislation mandating the addition of iodine. Large-scale iodization was in effect by 1924, accompanied by an educational campaign in schools and communities. Since then, goiters caused by iodine deficiency are rare in the United States (although mild iodine deficiency has returned partially due to less consumption of fortified salt).

By 1935, Vitamin D enriched milk also appeared on the American market. Rickets, a deformity and dysfunction of the bones, was a common problem among young children, especially poor children living in the industrialized northern cities who lacked enough sunlight and calcium in their diet. The medical community strongly supported the new product. The government played little role except to allow dairies to fortify milk since federal regulations permitted enrichment only to foods that had lost vitamins during processing.

Bread was one of those processed foods, with most cereal flours now milled in ways that required less labor and resulted in a flour that went rancid less quickly. The nutritional cost was a loss of B vitamins, important in the function of nerve cells. A diet low in B vitamins already plagued poor people in rural America, who often depended on low nutrient corn. The symptoms of beriberi, caused by a lack of Vitamin B₁, range from swollen legs and a rapid heart rate to paralysis and heart failure. Eventually, a B₁ deficiency can result in permanent brain damage, including memory loss and hallucinations. Similarly, pellagra is caused by too little Vitamin B₃ and was diagnosed in the American South based on the “4Ds”—diarrhea, dermatitis, dementia, and death. People with severe cases of pellagra often died in mental hospitals.

As with iodization, an appeal to public service and the threat of legislation convinced the baking industry to fortify their bread with high-vitamin yeast or synthetic vitamins. There was also the pressure of national security. A shocking number of young Americans drafted for World War II were so malnourished as to be unfit for duty. In 1942, the U.S. Army began to purchase only enriched flour for its servicemen. An advertisement in one medical journal asked a handsome, puzzled soldier, “What has toast got to do with winning the war?” The answer was that the extra vitamins and minerals in enriched white bread “give you the added punch you need to tackle your war job.”

Most of the fortification in the United States was led by educational programs, consumer demand, and market competition. Eventually, a higher standard of living and a diet that included more animal products meant that diseases like rickets, beriberi, scurvy, and pellagra are now relatively unknown, even as they remain common in other parts of the world. Fortifying staples like salt, milk, and flour was a first step—a leap forward.

Globally, fortification has moved in fits and starts. In 1986, the United Nations created the Coordinating Committee on Iodine Deficiency Disorders. In 1993, a group that included the Canadian government, UNICEF, and USAID formed the nonprofit international Micronutrient Initiative. In 2002, the UN started the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition. Since then, GAIN has reached an estimated billion people in forty countries, adding iodine to salt in Ethiopia, iron to soy sauce in China, and Vitamin A to vegetable oils in Afghanistan. In Morocco, they fortify wheat with a mix of vitamins and minerals. In Brazil, they fortify rice. Private enterprise, as well as government support, is part of this imminently scalable effort.

 

—————————————–

By the same Author on PEAH

The Strategy of Hope

 Déjà Vu: Within Our Grasp

 

 

News Flash Links, as part of the research project PEAH (Policies for Equitable Access to Health), aim to focus on the latest challenges by trade and governments rules to equitable access to health in resource-limited settings

Elviscot ship wreck, Elba island, Italy

News Flash 550

Weekly Snapshot of Public Health Challenges

 

Registration: PHM – Gender justice & health webinar Nov 30, 2023

African Leaders Gather to Break Barriers, Reposition Continent in Global Health

Plan to Strengthen African Public Health Systems Moves to Phase 2

Public health in China: time to invest in prevention

FOOD 2030 Conference in Brussels: Green and resilient food systems 4 December, 2023 – 5 December, 2023

World Bank Reform: Landing as a Tiger or as a Housecat?

The colonial roots of global south debt: A tale of plunder, exploitation and resistance

New ways to fight migrant smuggling

Niger coup leader repeals law against migrant traffickers

UN committee criticizes Denmark on third country plans for asylum seekers

WHO celebrates the role of communities in driving progress towards ending AIDS

Q&A: Access to cabotegravir long-acting (CAB-LA) for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP)

Arriving At A Fair Price In The Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program: Considerations From Other Countries

The new EU compulsory licensing regime needs to allow the export of medicines

Increasing Africa’s Vaccine Manufacturing Capacity Will Bring ‘Second Independence’ for the Continent

mRNA 3rd Scientific Colloquium on vaccine access and equity on the African Continent

IPS – COP28 2023

COP28: UN Climate Change Conference – United Arab Emirates 30 Nov – 12 Dec

Ahead of COP28, research shows the world far behind in climate fight

Dear World Leaders, Are You Listening Now?

Rich Distort Climate Problems, Offer Self-Serving Solutions

Brazil to propose mega fund to conserve forests at COP28 climate summit

Global health community calls for urgent action on climate and health at COP28

Time is Running Out to Avert Plastics Catastrophe as Global Treaty Negotiations Reach Stalemate

Rockefeller Foundation Makes Net Zero Pledge for $6 Billion Endowment

How Much Climate Finance? An Inconvenient Truth

COP28 Should Set a Combined Climate and Development Finance Goal for People and Planet

If there isn’t more money at COP28, spend money differently instead

COP28: cash pledges needed to spur loss and damage fund

Join the #HealthToo movement

How to get pregnant women to hospitals when ambulances can’t reach them

Reducing adolescent inequity through strategic investment: a global perspective

 

 

 

 

 

 

News Flash Links, as part of the research project PEAH (Policies for Equitable Access to Health), aim to focus on the latest challenges by trade and governments rules to equitable access to health in resource-limited settings

Elviscot ship wreck, Elba island, Italy

News Flash 549

Weekly Snapshot of Public Health Challenges

 

Webinar registration: mRNA 3rd Scientific Colloquium on vaccine access and equity on the African continent Nov 27, 2023

WHO is an Essential Forum for Debates on Intellectual Property and Public Health

People’s Health Dispatch Bulletin #63: Health workers push for ceasefire in Palestine

Measles Outbreaks Surge as Millions of Children Remain Unvaccinated

Rapid Diagnosis of Dengue: a Crucial Tool in Global Healthcare   by Nicolas Castillo

Breakthroughs hailed in childhood TB prevention

TB REACH´s Wave 11 call for proposal on innovative approaches to integrate TB service delivery with lung health at the primary and community level of the health systems. Deadline 17 January 2024

Dramatic upscaling of vaccination needed in West Africa to curb deadly diphtheria outbreaks

Malaria Jabs Set For Broader Rollout In Africa

World’s first clinical trial for devastating fungal disease mycetoma shows efficacy of new, promising treatment

EU pharmaceutical legislation: tackling the AMR innovation challenge for a healthier future

AMR in Central & Eastern Europe: What do patients think?

Antibiotics and their invisible threats

Consumption of antimicrobials in animals reaches lowest level ever in Europe

Global partners cheer progress towards eliminating cervical cancer and underline challenges

1.3 million women screened for cervical cancer across 10 countries

Improving Trauma-Informed Care in the Face of Firearm Violence

Aid under threat: The shadowy business of private sector instruments

AFEW International STRATEGIC PLAN 2023—2025

WHO issues new guideline to tackle acute malnutrition in children under five

Three Messages on School Meals for the Global Food Security Summit

FOOD 2030: Green and resilient food systems 4 December, 2023 – 5 December, 2023

Eating less meat would be good for the Earth. Small nudges can change behavior

Accelerating Change: Global Call to Action on World Toilet Day to Meet 2030 Sanitation Goals

The 2023 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: the imperative for a health-centred response in a world facing irreversible harms

Solar energy could power all health facilities in poorer countries and save lives, experts say

Carbon offset price of $25-$35/ton would boost climate action – ADB climate envoy

New law proposed to improve resilience of European forests

Crunch time for climate: major milestone with first final agreement on transnational CO2 transport and storage

Call for Papers MITIGATING AND ADAPTING TO CLIMATE CHANGE: EVIDENCE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH (abstract deadline: 2 Dec 2023)

Health groups pick fossil fuel phaseout as top priority at COP 28

Phasing down or phasing up? Top fossil fuel producers plan even more extraction despite climate promises Production Gap Report 2023 

Africa: Plastic Pollution Crisis Deepens Despite Global Efforts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This article explores the fundamental importance of implementing rapid tests in the diagnosis of dengue, emphasizing their essential role in early detection and efficient management of this mosquito-transmitted disease. These tests, based on the detection of viral antigens or specific antibodies, not only provide results in record time but also constitute a significant contribution to global healthcare.

Rapid tests offer an immediate response, allowing timely medical intervention that can make a difference in the clinical course of the patient. Their ability to identify the virus in the early stages of infection is crucial, not only for individualized care but also for mitigating the spread of dengue at the community level. Moreover, by distinguishing between virus serotypes, these tests provide a more precise perspective for the application of therapeutic and preventive strategies. The accessibility and simplicity of rapid tests become key elements for their positive impact, especially in resource-limited settings. The swift availability of results not only accelerates clinical decision-making but also facilitates the collection of crucial epidemiological data. This information contributes to the strategic planning of public health authorities, enabling a coordinated and efficient response to dengue outbreaks and epidemics.

The widespread adoption of rapid tests in dengue diagnosis emerges as a fundamental pillar in global healthcare. Their ability to provide rapid and accurate results, their role in early detection, and their contribution to efficient management make these tests an invaluable tool in the fight against this prevalent disease, redefining how we approach the diagnosis and treatment of dengue on a global scale

By Nicolás Castillo

Biochemical. Private Laboratory Santa Clara de Saguier Sanatorium, Santa Fe, Argentina  

Rapid Diagnosis of Dengue

a Crucial Tool in Global Healthcare

 

Introduction

Dengue, a mosquito-borne viral disease transmitted by Aedes mosquitoes, has become a growing concern for global health due to its significant impact in various regions worldwide. The complexity of the infection, ranging from mild to potentially life-threatening cases, underscores the critical importance of effective detection and management strategies. Swift identification of the virus stands as an essential pillar for the efficient management of individual cases and the prevention of epidemic spread.

In this context, rapid tests have emerged as fundamental tools in the diagnosis of dengue, offering innovative and efficient solutions to address the clinical challenges associated with this disease.

These tests, based on the detection of viral antigens or specific antibodies, not only provide rapid results but also play a crucial role in enabling timely medical interventions. This immediate responsiveness translates into improved disease management, minimizing morbidity, and contributing to the prevention of severe complications.

As the burden of dengue continues to be a public health concern, research and the implementation of advanced diagnostic tools become imperative. Rapid tests, by offering a unique combination of speed and accuracy, position themselves as essential components in a comprehensive strategy to address dengue.

Development

The constant evolution in the fields of medicine and technology has led to an ongoing reevaluation of diagnostic methods for infectious diseases such as dengue. Particularly, the introduction of rapid tests has marked a paradigm shift in how we approach the identification and management of this mosquito-borne viral disease.

Rapid tests for dengue are based on the detection of viral antigens or specific antibodies in the patient’s sample. Unlike conventional methods such as serology and polymerase chain reaction (PCR), these tests offer a crucial advantage in terms of agility and simplicity. The immunochromatographic response allows for results in a matter of minutes, facilitating timely medical intervention.

The sensitivity and specificity of rapid tests are determining factors in their effectiveness. Numerous clinical studies have demonstrated their ability to detect the dengue virus in the early stages of infection, even before evident clinical symptoms appear. Early identification of cases benefits not only the individual patient but also holds significant implications for the community and epidemiological management of the disease.

The distinction between virus serotypes is crucial, as certain serotypes can trigger more severe forms of the disease. Rapid tests, by providing information about the specific serotype present in the sample, enable a more precise adaptation of treatment and control strategies. This capability to distinguish between different serotypes represents a significant advancement in tailoring medical care for patients affected by dengue.

Moreover, the application of these tests in daily clinical practice provides a valuable tool for informed decision-making by healthcare professionals. The swift availability of results allows for the immediate implementation of preventive and therapeutic measures, reducing morbidity and mortality associated with dengue. This translates into more efficient and effective care, especially in resource-limited settings.

Nevertheless, it is crucial to address some challenges associated with the widespread implementation of rapid tests. Variability in the sensitivity of these tests in different infection stages and diverse populations can impact their performance. Additionally, proper training of healthcare personnel is essential to ensure accurate interpretation of results and their effective integration into clinical protocols.

The integration of rapid tests into clinical practice not only has implications at the individual level but also at the epidemiological level. Accurate data collection on dengue prevalence and serotype distribution facilitates a more effective response to outbreaks and epidemics. Epidemiological information derived from these tests contributes to the strategic planning of public health authorities, enabling more efficient resource allocation and a rapid response to emergency situations.

In conclusion, rapid tests have emerged as essential tools in the diagnosis of dengue, offering a unique combination of speed, effectiveness, and accessibility. Their proper implementation and continuous research in this area are crucial to maximizing their positive impact on clinical and epidemiological management of dengue. These advancements not only enhance individual patient care but also significantly contribute to mitigating the global burden of this mosquito-borne disease.

Discussion

The widespread implementation of rapid tests in dengue diagnosis presents challenges and opportunities. It is crucial to address the variability in the sensitivity of these tests, considering the dynamics of infection and the patient’s immune response. Proper training of healthcare personnel and the integration of these tests into clinical protocols are key aspects to maximize their positive impact.

Early detection of dengue not only benefits the individual patient but also contributes to the effective management of outbreaks and epidemics. The ability to identify cases quickly allows for a more efficient mobilization of resources and the implementation of vector control measures. Additionally, the collection of accurate epidemiological data facilitates informed decision-making by public health authorities.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the incorporation of rapid tests in dengue diagnosis represents a significant advancement in the fight against this disease. The speed and effectiveness of these tests have the potential to transform clinical and epidemiological management, improving outcomes for patients and the community at large. Proper implementation and ongoing research in this area are essential to maximize the benefits of these rapid diagnostics and contribute to the global reduction of the dengue burden.

References

1. World Health Organization. Dengue: Guidelines for Diagnosis, Treatment, Prevention and Control. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009.
2. Guzmán MG, Kourí G. Dengue: an update. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2002;2(1):33-42.
3. Peeling RW, Artsob H, Pelegrino JL, et al. Evaluation of diagnostic tests: dengue. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2010;8(12 Suppl):S30-38.

 Additional Citations

Bhatt S, Gething PW, Brady OJ, et al. The global distribution and burden of dengue. Nature. 2013;496(7446):504-507.

Simmons CP, Farrar JJ, Nguyen V, Wills B. Dengue. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2012;366(15):1423-1432.

Wilder-Smith A, Ooi EE, Horstick O, Wills B. Dengue. The Lancet. 2019;393(10169):350-363.

 

______

BY THE SAME AUTHOR ON PEAH 

Preparing for the Future: The Vitality of an Effective Testing Strategy in Future Pandemics 

 The Positive Impact of Artificial Intelligence in Future Pandemics 

The Value of Communication in a Pandemic 

Epidemiological Surveillance in Pandemics

Population Aging, a Challenge for Public Health in Latin America and the World

 

 

 

 

News Flash Links, as part of the research project PEAH (Policies for Equitable Access to Health), aim to focus on the latest challenges by trade and governments rules to equitable access to health in resource-limited settings

Hermit crab (Dardanus calidus)

News Flash 548

Weekly Snapshot of Public Health Challenges

 

The rest and the west

Webinar registration: Clean Cooking for Public Health manifesto launch – Safeguarding health from gas cooking Nov 21, 2023

Webinar registration: What are the regulatory tasks in the oversight of clinical trials? Nov 21, 2023

Registration: 6th EPHA Universal Access and Affordable Medicines Forum Inizio modulo December 8 2023

European Public Health Alliance (epha): Strengthening Public Health Across the European Union

DNDi: 20 years of delivering treatments for neglected patients

Second World Local Production Forum Launches New Collaborations; Civil Society Protests IP Barriers

WHO updates guidelines on treatments for COVID-19

A global research agenda on public health and social measures during emergencies

Two New RSV Products to Protect Infants

Existing terminology related to antimicrobial resistance fails to evoke risk perceptions and be remembered

ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE TOOLKIT

MSF warns governments are failing to test, treat and prevent TB in children

Target product profiles: tests for tuberculosis treatment monitoring and optimization

Access to TB Testing and Treatments: GeneXpert and Delamanid

Landmark Clinical Trial Redefines Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis Treatment Options

World Diabetes Day: How insulin pens improve the lives of people with diabetes

Tobacco Industry’s Interference in Government Policy Increases Globally

43 million went hungry in Latam, Caribbean last year: UN

Hunger, Food Sovereignty and COVID-19 Pandemic: Food Risks During Lockdown

EU actions to enhance global food security

Solar panels bring power to rural health facilities

Artificial Intelligence vs. Agroecology? New report exposes how digitalization and artificial intelligence risk undermining peasant knowledge and autonomy

National nutrition surveillance programmes in 18 countries in SouthEast Asia and Western Pacific Regions: a systematic scoping review

HRR 704 (COP29 special) NATURE DOES NOT BELONG TO US; WE BELONG TO NATURE –AND NATURE HAS ESTABLISHED RIGHTS (and will ultimately win despite of us!)

Study: Extreme Dry Condition in Syria, Iraq, Iran due to Climate Change

In UN talks for a global plastic treaty, delegates to face off over production limits

China’s development banks provided no green energy finance in 2022 -research

Time to Convert Climate Change Rhetoric into Action, Says WFP’s Gernot Laganda

Asia Pacific’s waste disposal a burning question

Coffee has a climate problem. Here’s how to fix it

Climate change altering U.S. in profound ways, major report finds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

News Flash Links, as part of the research project PEAH (Policies for Equitable Access to Health), aim to focus on the latest challenges by trade and governments rules to equitable access to health in resource-limited settings

Salema (Sarpa salpa)

News Flash 547

Weekly Snapshot of Public Health Challenges

 

ONE HEALTH FOR ALL, ALL FOR ONE HEALTH Conference at the European Convention Centre Luxembourg (ECCL) 13 November 2023

Lancet webinar registration: Universal Health Coverage-looking back and moving forward

People’s Health Dispatch Bulletin #62: Healthcare in Palestine in the line of fire

Offline: Gaza’s children—a responsibility to protect 

‘A living hell’: How health systems are crumbling in Gaza

‘Pity the region’* – Gaza and the politics of health in the Middle East

Humanitarian pauses and ceasefires – what are the differences?

Gender-Responsive Pandemic Preparedness, Prevention, Response and Recovery (PPRR)

Pandemic Accord: MSF statement on INB proposal for negotiating text

WHO lobbies EU lawmakers against watering down alcohol cancer risk

Medicine is plagued by untrustworthy clinical trials. How many studies are faked or flawed?

Factors associated with unsuccessful tuberculosis treatment among homeless persons in Brazil: A retrospective cohort study from 2015 to 2020

7.5 MILLION PEOPLE WITH TB WERE DIAGNOSED AND TREATED IN 2022 – THE HIGHEST EVER ACCESSING TB CARE!

Tuberculosis response recovering from pandemic but accelerated efforts needed to meet new targets

MSF responds to WHO’s annual global TB report: implores governments to use recent TB wins to beat back deadly infectious disease

The often lethal “side effects” of sanctions on pharmaceutical systems

Fighting Malnutrition and Changing Mindsets in Rwanda

Govts should stop converting land use – UN scientist

PPPs Fiscal Hoax Is a Blank Financial Silver Bullet

HRR 703 THE MOST COMMON WAY PEOPLE GIVE UP THEIR POWER IS BY THINKING THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY

Reforming Algeria’s social protection system

Call for a New Cadre of Pharmaceutical Professionals to Strengthen LMIC Systems

Exclusive: Belgium drafting new fuel quality law targeting exports to Africa

WHO, the Right to Health and the Climate Crisis – What Advice for the ICJ?  by David Patterson

Climate Crisis Is Generating Global Health Crisis, UN Agency Says

Exclusive: EU, US, COP28 hosts rally support for global deal to triple renewable energy

Severe Air Pollution Takes Delhi by Surprise

Death and displacement as floods hit East Africa

This year ‘virtually certain’ to be warmest in 125,000 years, EU scientists say

Webinar registration: Blended finance for climate action – Risks and opportunities of an emerging agenda 21 November 2023

Governments plan more fossil fuel production despite climate pledges, report says

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The UN Charter gives the UN General Assembly (UNGA) and the Security Council the power to request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on any legal question. In March 2023, the ICJ received a much anticipated request from the UNGA to advise States on their legal obligations regarding climate change. The UNGA’s request covers different areas of international law, including human rights law and the right to health. 

The World Health Organization (WHO) has the opportunity to make a submission. 

In view of the WHO’s longstanding work and advocacy on climate change as the pre-eminent public health concern of this century, it would be a lost opportunity if WHO only submits technical reports on the impact of climate change on health. More valuable would be a strong statement of the international legal arguments for State obligations to address climate change from the right to health perspective

 By David Patterson, LLM, MSc, PhD Candidate

 Groningen Centre for Health Law

Department of Transboundary Legal Studies, Faculty of Law

University of Groningen, Netherlands  

Member, Steering Committee, EUPHA law and public health section

 WHO, the Right to Health and the Climate Crisis – What Advice for the ICJ?

 

The UN Charter gives the UN General Assembly (UNGA) and the Security Council the power to request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on any legal question. The same is true for UN specialised agencies (within the scope of their activities), including the World Health Organization (WHO). Advisory opinions are generally not binding however they carry great legal weight and moral authority.

Thirty years ago, in 1993, the World Health Assembly (WHA) asked the ICJ to advise on the legality of the use of nuclear weapons in war or other armed conflict. The WHO then made substantive legal submissions to the ICJ on the issue. This was a bold, highly political move by the WHA and the WHO, and reflected worldwide concerns about nuclear annihilation at that time.

This year the ICJ has again been called to advise on an issue affecting the very survival of humankind. In March 2023, the ICJ received a much anticipated request from the UNGA to advise States on their legal obligations regarding climate change. The UNGA’s request covers different areas of international law, including human rights law and the right to health.

All the currently submitted documentation is on the ICJ website. The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) have submitted technical reports. But these reports don’t address States’ international legal obligations. Other stakeholders, including the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), have also been accredited to make submissions. They may well argue for a narrow interpretation of States’ obligations.

In view of the WHO’s longstanding work and advocacy on climate change as the pre-eminent public health concern of this century, it would be a lost opportunity if WHO only submits technical reports on the impact of climate change on health. This information is already well-documented by Lancet Countdown and other sources. More valuable would be a strong statement of the international legal arguments for State obligations to address climate change from the right to health perspective.

The broad arguments are already well-articulated by authoritative sources. In July 2022 the UN General Assembly declared access to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment a universal human right. In August 2023 the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) issued General Comment 26 on children’s rights and the environment, with a special focus on climate change. The CRC discussed the right to the highest attainable standard of health and noted, for example, obligations regarding national health plans, policies and strategies, and legislative, regulatory and institutional frameworks. The CRC also advised that States should immediately ‘…equitably phase out the use of coal, oil and natural gas, ensure a fair and just transition of energy sources and invest in renewable energy, energy storage and energy efficiency…’

Under international law States also have obligations to provide international assistance commensurate with their capacities, resources and influence. States in a position to do so should provide international assistance, including financial, technological, and other forms of assistance, to contribute to the realization of human rights of present and future generations. WHO should also explore these obligations in its submission to the ICJ.

The WHO Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has done much to affirm the right to health under international law, including through a statement on Human Rights Day in 2017, an article in The Lancet in 2018 and at the launch of a major report on global health and the law in 2019 (his remarks in this video could not be clearer or more compelling). WHO’s Key Facts on Human Rights (10 December 2022) reiterates that ‘The right to the highest attainable standard of health’ implies a clear set of legal obligations on states to ensure appropriate conditions for the enjoyment of health for all people without discrimination.’ In February 2023, WHO reiterated the importance of rights-based approaches to the climate crisis in a submission regarding the first Global Stocktake.

The deadline for ICJ submissions is 22 January 2024. States and organizations which have made submissions may then make written comments on other statements submitted to the ICJ.

The international human rights legal framework we have today was forged in the ashes of wars in first half of the 20^th century. Yet those horrors do not approach the devastation inaction today will bring current and future generations. There is now a unique opportunity for WHO to stress, at the highest international legal level, that combatting climate change for public health is not just a matter of sound policy making. States also have legal obligations to respect, protect and fulfil the right to health in the context of climate change. This includes obligations of international assistance and cooperation.

Cross-posted to the Groningen Centre for Health Law blog

 

By the same Author on PEAH

Strategic Litigation and Social Mobilisation: Part of Public Health’s Advocacy Toolbox to Address the Climate Crisis 

Public Health, Climate Change and Strategic Litigation: Building a Powerful Alliance between Public Health Practitioners, Communities, and Legal Advocates 

Why Some Global Health Experts Didn’t Sign the Call on the United Nations for Human Rights Guidelines on Healthy Diets and Sustainable Food Systems 

Pick the Odd One Out: Sugar, Salt, Animal Fat, Climate Change: What Are We Teaching? 

Falsified and Substandard Medicines: Threat to the SDGs – but Who’s Watching, Caring or Acting?