Human rights and the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective and prospective analysis.

When the history of the COVID-19 pandemic is written, the failure of many states to live up to their human rights obligations should be a central narrative. The pandemic began with Wuhan officials in China suppressing information, silencing whistleblowers, and violating the freedom of expression and the right to health. Since then, COVID-19's effects have been profoundly unequal, both nationally and globally. These inequalities have emphatically highlighted how far countries are from meeting the supreme human rights command of non-discrimination, from achieving the highest attainable standard of health that is equally the right of all people everywhere, and from taking the human rights obligation of international assistance and cooperation seriously. We propose embedding human rights and equity within a transformed global health architecture as the necessary response to COVID-19's rights violations. This means vastly more funding from high-income countries to support low-income and middle-income countries in rights-based recoveries, plus implementing measures to ensure equitable distribution of COVID-19 medical technologies. We also emphasise structured approaches to funding and equitable distribution going forward, which includes embedding human rights into a new pandemic treaty. Above all, new legal instruments and mechanisms, from a right to health treaty to a fund for civil society right to health advocacy, are required so that the narratives of future health emergencies-and people's daily lives-are ones of equality and human rights.

The Global Health Architecture: Governance and International Institutions to Advance Population Health Worldwide.

Policy Points Global health institutions and instruments should be reformed to fully incorporate the principles of good health governance: the right to health, equity, inclusive participation, transparency, accountability, and global solidarity. New legal instruments, like International Health Regulations amendments and the pandemic treaty, should be grounded in these principles of sound governance. Equity should be embedded into the prevention of, preparedness for, response to, and recovery from catastrophic health threats, within and across nations and sectors. This includes the extant model of charitable contributions for access to medical resources giving way to a new model that empowers low- and middle-income countries to create and produce their own diagnostics, vaccines, and therapeutics-such as through regional messenger RNA vaccine manufacturing hubs. Robust and sustainable funding of key institutions, national health systems, and civil society will ensure more effective and just responses to health emergencies, including the daily toll of avoidable death and disease disproportionately experienced by poorer and more marginalized populations.

[Planning for health equity in the Americas: an analysis of national health plansPlanejamento para equidade em saúde nas Américas: uma análise dos planos nacionais de saúde]. / Planificación para la equidad en la salud en la Región de las Américas: análisis de los planes nacionales de salud.

There is growing recognition that health and well-being improvements have not been shared across populations in the Americas. This article analyzes 32 national health sector policies, strategies, and plans across 10 different areas of health equity to understand, from one perspective, how equity is being addressed in the region. It finds significant variation in the substance and structure of how the health plans handle the issue. Nearly all countries explicitly include health equity as a clear goal, and most address the social determinants of health. Participatory processes documented in the development of these plans range from none to extensive and robust. Substantive equity-focused policies, such as those to improve physical accessibility of health care and increase affordable access to medicines, are included in many plans, though no country includes all aspects examined. Countries identify marginalized populations in their plans, though only a quarter specifically identify Afro-descendants and more than half do not address Indigenous people, including countries with large Indigenous populations. Four include attention to migrants. Despite health equity goals and data on baseline inequities, fewer than half of countries include time-bound targets on reducing absolute or relative health inequalities. Clear accountability mechanisms such as education, reporting, or rights-enforcement mechanisms in plans are rare. The nearly unanimous commitment across countries of the Americas to equity in health provides an important opportunity. Learning from the most robust equity-focused plans could provide a road map for efforts to translate broad goals into time-bound targets and eventually to increasing equity.

É cada vez mais aceito que os avanços em saúde e bem-estar não são partilhados por todas as populações nas Américas. Neste artigo são analisadas 32 políticas, estratégias e planos nacionais de saúde em 10 áreas distintas de equidade em saúde com o objetivo de entender, de uma única perspectiva, como a equidade está sendo contemplada na região. Existem diferenças consideráveis na forma e conteúdo do enfoque dado a esta questão nos planos de saúde. Quase todos os países estabelecem explicitamente a equidade em saúde como uma meta clara e a maioria aborda os determinantes sociais da saúde. O processo participativo documentado na elaboração dos planos também é variável, desde inexistente a amplo e decidido. Muitos planos contêm políticas concretas com foco central em equidade, por exemplo, políticas para melhorar a acessibilidade física à assistência de saúde e o acesso a medicamentos a preços razoáveis, mas nenhum país inclui todos os aspectos aqui examinados. Os países identificam as populações marginalizadas nos seus planos, porém, apenas um quarto distingue especificamente os afrodescendentes e mais da metade não contempla os povos indígenas, mesmo onde as populações indígenas são em grande número. Quatro países consideram a atenção aos migrantes. Embora existam metas de equidade em saúde e dados relativos a iniquidades de base, menos da metade dos países incorpora em seus planos metas com prazos definidos para reduzir as desigualdades absolutas ou relativas em saúde. Instrumentos claros de responsabilidade como educação, prestação de contas ou respeito aos direitos são raramente vistos. O compromisso praticamente unânime dos países das Américas com a equidade em saúde oferece uma oportunidade importante. Os planos mais bem fundados com enfoque em equidade poderiam servir de exemplo para guiar os esforços de converter metas gerais em metas com prazos definidos e, em última instância, aumentar a equidade.

Planning for health equity in the Americas: an analysis of national health plans.

There is growing recognition that health and well-being improvements have not been shared across populations in the Americas. This article analyzes 32 national health sector policies, strategies, and plans across 10 different areas of health equity to understand, from one perspective, how equity is being addressed in the region. It finds significant variation in the substance and structure of how the health plans handle the issue. Nearly all countries explicitly include health equity as a clear goal, and most address the social determinants of health. Participatory processes documented in the development of these plans range from none to extensive and robust. Substantive equity-focused policies, such as those to improve physical accessibility of health care and increase affordable access to medicines, are included in many plans, though no country includes all aspects examined. Countries identify marginalized populations in their plans, though only a quarter specifically identify Afro-descendants and more than half do not address Indigenous people, including countries with large Indigenous populations. Four include attention to migrants. Despite health equity goals and data on baseline inequities, fewer than half of countries include time-bound targets on reducing absolute or relative health inequalities. Clear accountability mechanisms such as education, reporting, or rights-enforcement mechanisms in plans are rare. The nearly unanimous commitment across countries of the Americas to equity in health provides an important opportunity. Learning from the most robust equity-focused plans could provide a road map for efforts to translate broad goals into time-bound targets and eventually to increasing equity.

Cada vez es mayor el reconocimiento de que las mejoras en cuanto a la salud y el bienestar no han llegado por igual a todos los segmentos de la población en la Región de las Américas. En este artículo se analizan 32 políticas, estrategias y planes nacionales del sector de la salud con respecto a diez áreas distintas relativas a la equidad en la salud. El objetivo es comprender, desde una perspectiva, cómo se está abordando la equidad en la Región. Se ha encontrado una variación significativa, tanto en sustancia como en estructura, sobre la manera en que se maneja el tema en los planes de salud. Casi todos los países incluyen explícitamente la equidad en la salud como una meta clara y la mayoría abordan los determinantes sociales de la salud. En la formulación de estos planes se ha documentado desde ningún proceso participativo hasta procesos participativos exhaustivos y sólidos. En muchos planes se han incluido políticas sustantivas centradas en la equidad, como aquellas para mejorar la accesibilidad física a la atención de salud y el acceso a medicamentos asequibles, pero en ningún país se incorporan todos los aspectos analizados. Si bien los países contemplan a los grupos marginados en sus planes, solo una cuarta parte identifica específicamente a las personas afrodescendientes y más de la mitad de los países no considera a las personas indígenas, incluso en el caso de algunos países con una población indígena grande. Cuatro países contemplan la atención médica a los migrantes. A pesar de que existen metas sobre la equidad en la salud y datos de línea de base sobre las inequidades, menos de la mitad de los países incluyen metas con plazos para reducir las inequidades en la salud absolutas o relativas. No son habituales tampoco en los planes los mecanismos de rendición de cuentas claros, como educación, presentación de informes o cumplimiento de los derechos. Los países de la Región de las Américas muestran un compromiso casi unánime con la equidad en la salud, lo cual brinda una oportunidad importante. Aprender de los planes para la equidad más sólidos podría proporcionar una hoja de ruta para las iniciativas que tratan de traducir algunas metas amplias en metas con plazos específicos que puedan eventualmente mejorar la equidad.

É cada vez mais aceito que os avanços em saúde e bem-estar não são partilhados por todas as populações nas Américas. Neste artigo são analisadas 32 políticas, estratégias e planos nacionais de saúde em 10 áreas distintas de equidade em saúde com o objetivo de entender, de uma única perspectiva, como a equidade está sendo contemplada na região. Existem diferenças consideráveis na forma e conteúdo do enfoque dado a esta questão nos planos de saúde. Quase todos os países estabelecem explicitamente a equidade em saúde como uma meta clara e a maioria aborda os determinantes sociais da saúde. O processo participativo documentado na elaboração dos planos também é variável, desde inexistente a amplo e decidido. Muitos planos contêm políticas concretas com foco central em equidade, por exemplo, políticas para melhorar a acessibilidade física à assistência de saúde e o acesso a medicamentos a preços razoáveis, mas nenhum país inclui todos os aspectos aqui examinados. Os países identificam as populações marginalizadas nos seus planos, porém, apenas um quarto distingue especificamente os afrodescendentes e mais da metade não contempla os povos indígenas, mesmo onde as populações indígenas são em grande número. Quatro países consideram a atenção aos migrantes. Embora existam metas de equidade em saúde e dados relativos a iniquidades de base, menos da metade dos países incorpora em seus planos metas com prazos definidos para reduzir as desigualdades absolutas ou relativas em saúde. Instrumentos claros de responsabilidade como educação, prestação de contas ou respeito aos direitos são raramente vistos. O compromisso praticamente unânime dos países das Américas com a equidade em saúde oferece uma oportunidade importante. Os planos mais bem fundados com enfoque em equidade poderiam servir de exemplo para guiar os esforços de converter metas gerais em metas com prazos definidos e, em última instância, aumentar a equidade.

Reimagining WHO: leadership and action for a new Director-General.

Three candidates to be the next WHO Director-General remain: Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, David Nabarro, and Sania Nishtar. The World Health Assembly's ultimate choice will lead an organisation facing daunting internal and external challenges, from its own funding shortfalls to antimicrobial resistance and immense health inequities. The new Director-General must transform WHO into a 21st century institution guided by the right to health. Topping the incoming Director-General's agenda will be a host of growing threats-risks to global health security, antimicrobial resistance, non-communicable diseases, and climate change-but also the transformative potential of the Sustainable Development Goals, including their universal health coverage target. Throughout, the next Director-General should emphasise equality, including through national health equity strategies and, more boldly still, advancing the Framework Convention on Global Health. Success in these areas will require a reinvigorated WHO, with sustainable financing, greater multisector engagement, enhanced accountability and transparency, and strengthened normative leadership. WHO must also evolve its governance to become far more welcoming of civil society and communities. To create the foundation for these transformative changes, the Director-General will need to focus first on gaining political support. This entails improving accountability and transparency to gain member state trust, and enabling meaningful civil society participation in WHO's governance and standing up for the right to health to gain civil society support. Ultimately, in the face of a global environment marked by heightened nationalism and xenophobia, member states must empower the next Director-General to enable WHO to be a bulwark for health and human rights, serving as an inspiring contra-example to today's destructive politics, demonstrating that the community of nations are indeed stronger together.

From local adaptation to activism and global solidarity: framing a research and innovation agenda towards true health equity.

The proposal for a global health treaty aimed at health equity, the Framework Convention on Global Health, raises the fundamental question of whether we can achieve true health equity, globally and domestically, and if not, how close we can come. Considerable knowledge currently exists about the measures required to, at the least, greatly improve health equity. Why, then, do immense inequities remain? Building on this basic question, we propose four areas that could help drive the health equity research and innovation agenda over the coming years.First, recognizing that local contexts will often affect the success of policies aimed at health equity, local research will be critical to adapt strategies to particular settings. This part of the research agenda would be well-served by directly engaging intended beneficiaries for their insights, including through participatory action research, where the research contributes to action towards greater health equity.Second, even with the need for more local knowledge, why is the copious knowledge on how to reduce inequities not more frequently acted upon? What are the best strategies to close policymakers' knowledge gaps and to generate the political will to apply existing knowledge about improving health equity, developing the policies and devoting the resources required? Linked to this is the need to continue to build our understanding of how to empower the activism that can reshape power dynamics.Today's unequal power dynamics contribute significantly to disparities in a third area of focus, the social determinants of health, which are the primary drivers of today's health inequities. Continuing to improve our understanding of the pathways through which they operate can help in developing strategies to change these determinants and disrupt harmful pathways.And fourth, we return to the motivating question of whether we can achieve health equity. For example, can all countries have universal health coverage that comprehensively meets all of people's health needs? How to foster the national and global solidarity to achieve such equity? The answers to questions such as these can help point the way to measures, often well outside the narrow realm of technical solutions, to realize the right to health, and to achieve and sustain substantive health equality.

A retrospective and prospective analysis of the west African Ebola virus disease epidemic: robust national health systems at the foundation and an empowered WHO at the apex.

The Ebola virus disease outbreak in west Africa is pivotal for the worldwide health system. Just as the depth of the crisis ultimately spurred an unprecedented response, the failures of leadership suggest the need for innovative reforms. Such reforms would transform the existing worldwide health system architecture into a purposeful, organised system with an empowered, highly capable WHO at its apex and enduring, equitable national health systems at its foundation. It would be designed not only to provide security against epidemic threats, but also to meet everyday health needs, thus realising the right to health. This retrospective and prospective analysis offers a template for these reforms, responding to the profound harms posed by fragile national health systems, delays in the international response, deficient resource mobilisation, ill defined responsibilities, and insufficient coordination. The scope of the reforms should address failures in the Ebola response, and entrenched weaknesses that enabled the epidemic to reach its heights.

Imagining Global Health with Justice: In Defense of the Right to Health.

The singular message in Global Health Law is that we must strive to achieve global health with justice--improved population health, with a fairer distribution of benefits of good health. Global health entails ensuring the conditions of good health--public health, universal health coverage, and the social determinants of health--while justice requires closing today's vast domestic and global health inequities. These conditions for good health should be incorporated into public policy, supplemented by specific actions to overcome barriers to equity. A new global health treaty grounded in the right to health and aimed at health equity--a Framework Convention on Global Health (FCGH)--stands out for its possibilities in helping to achieve global health with justice. This far-reaching legal instrument would establish minimum standards for universal health coverage and public health measures, with an accompanying national and international financing framework, require a constant focus on health equity, promote Health in All Policies and global governance for health, and advance the principles of good governance, including accountability. While achieving an FCGH is certainly ambitious, it is a struggle worth the efforts of us all. The treaty's basis in the right to health, which has been agreed to by all governments, has powerful potential to form the foundation of global governance for health. From interpretations of UN treaty bodies to judgments of national courts, the right to health is now sufficiently articulated to serve this role, with the individual's right to health best understood as a function of a social, political, and economic environment aimed at equity. However great the political challenge of securing state agreement to the FCGH, it is possible. States have joined other treaties with significant resource requirements and limitations on their sovereignty without significant reciprocal benefits from other states, while important state interests would benefit from the FCGH. And from integrating the FCGH into the existing human rights system to creative forms of compliance and enforcement and strengthened domestic legal and political accountability mechanisms, the treaty stands to improve right to health compliance. The potential for the FCGH to bring the right to health nearer universal reality calls for us to embark on the journey towards securing this global treaty.

Health, equity and the post-2015 agenda: raising the voices of marginalized communities.

In September 2012 the United Nations (UN) initiated a process that would extend and enhance the unfinished agenda of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), integrating a new vision for sustainable development beyond the year 2015. The initial consultation phase has been completed, with the UN and partner organizations undertaking eleven thematic consultations, including one on health. It is in this context that the European Commission (EC) has tasked the research consortium Goals and Governance for Global Health (Go4Health) with providing recommendations for the post-2015 health-related development goals and including voices that are routinely excluded from health-related decision-making processes. This has not been an easy task. It has led us to question how to define marginalization, how to access marginalized communities, as well as how community members could provide informed consent. The context of the communities we worked with was far removed from the reality of the post-2015 debates, where the MDGs and the new goals are remote and abstract, and where the promise of immediate benefit from participation could not be assured. Given the social, historical, cultural, ethnic and geographical diversity of our chosen community partners, and the diversity of their lived experiences, could their unique situations be generalized in ways that could influence the global debate? In this special issue, we have tried to explore the uniqueness and the commonalities of the issues and barriers that marginalized communities face all over the globe, and present them in individual papers that, together, provide a nuanced and complex picture of the challenges that face the post-2015 health-related agenda setting-process.

Community participation in formulating the post-2015 health and development goal agenda: reflections of a multi-country research collaboration.

Global discussion on the post-2015 development goals, to replace the Millennium Development Goals when they expire on 31 December 2015, is well underway. While the Millennium Development Goals focused on redressing extreme poverty and its antecedents for people living in developing countries, the post-2015 agenda seeks to redress inequity worldwide, regardless of a country's development status. Furthermore, to rectify the UN's top-down approach toward the Millennium Development Goals' formulation, widespread negotiations are underway that seek to include the voices of people and communities from around the globe to ground each post-2015 development goal. This reflexive commentary, therefore, reports on the early methodological challenges the Go4Health research project experienced in its engagement with communities in nine countries in 2013. Led by four research hubs in Uganda, Bangladesh, Australia and Guatemala, the purpose of this engagement has been to ascertain a 'snapshot' of the health needs and priorities of socially excluded populations particularly from the Global South. This is to inform Go4Health's advice to the European Commission on the post-2015 global goals for health and new governance frameworks. Five methodological challenges were subsequently identified from reflecting on the multidisciplinary, multiregional team's research practices so far: meanings and parameters around qualitative participatory research; representation of marginalization; generalizability of research findings; ethical research in project time frames; and issues related to informed consent. Strategies to overcome these methodological hurdles are also examined. The findings from the consultations represent the extraordinary diversity of marginal human experience requiring contextual analysis for universal framing of the post-2015 agenda. Unsurprisingly, methodological challenges will, and did, arise. We conclude by advocating for a discourse to emerge not only critically examining how and whose voices are being obtained at the community-level to inform the post-2015 health and development goal agenda, but also how these voices are being translated and integrated into post-2015 decision-making at national and global levels.

Is universal health coverage the practical expression of the right to health care?

The present Millennium Development Goals are set to expire in 2015 and their next iteration is now being discussed within the international community. With regards to health, the World Health Organization proposes universal health coverage as a 'single overarching health goal' for the next iteration of the Millennium Development Goals.The present Millennium Development Goals have been criticised for being 'duplicative' or even 'competing alternatives' to international human rights law. The question then arises, if universal health coverage would indeed become the single overarching health goal, replacing the present health-related Millennium Development Goals, would that be more consistent with the right to health? The World Health Organization seems to have anticipated the question, as it labels universal health coverage as "by definition, a practical expression of the concern for health equity and the right to health".Rather than waiting for the negotiations to unfold, we thought it would be useful to verify this contention, using a comparative normative analysis. We found that--to be a practical expression of the right to health--at least one element is missing in present authoritative definitions of universal health coverage: a straightforward confirmation that international assistance is essential, not optional.But universal health coverage is a 'work in progress'. A recent proposal by the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network proposed universal health coverage with a set of targets, including a target for international assistance, which would turn universal health coverage into a practical expression of the right to health care.

Achieving and Maintaining Equitable Health Outcomes for all, Including for Future Generations.

Sustainable health equity means achieving and maintaining equitable health outcomes for all people, including for future generations. It encompasses realizing the right to health, setting the conditions for leading a healthy life, and fulfilling the full range of human rights. Achieving sustainable health equity requires that public services be designed and provided, and public policies be developed through empowering, inclusive, participatory, accountable, and democratic processes and mechanisms.

The World Health Organization was born as a normative agency: Seventy-five years of global health law under WHO governance.

The World Health Organization (WHO) was born as a normative agency and has looked to global health law to structure collective action to realize global health with justice. Framed by its constitutional authority to act as the directing and coordinating authority on international health, WHO has long been seen as the central actor in the development and implementation of global health law. However, WHO has faced challenges in advancing law to prevent disease and promote health over the past 75 years, with global health law constrained by new health actors, shifting normative frameworks, and soft law diplomacy. These challenges were exacerbated amid the COVID-19 pandemic, as states neglected international legal commitments in national health responses. Yet, global health law reforms are now underway to strengthen WHO governance, signaling a return to lawmaking for global health. Looking back on WHO's 75th anniversary, this article examines the central importance of global health law under WHO governance, reviewing the past successes, missed opportunities, and future hopes for WHO. For WHO to meet its constitutional authority to become the normative agency it was born to be, we offer five proposals to reestablish a WHO fit for purpose: normative instruments, equity and human rights mainstreaming, sustainable financing, One Health, and good governance. Drawing from past struggles, these reforms will require further efforts to revitalize hard law authorities in global health, strengthen WHO leadership across the global governance landscape, uphold equity and rights at the center of global health law, and expand negotiations in global health diplomacy.

Towards a Framework Convention on Global Health: a transformative agenda for global health justice.

Global health inequities cause nearly 20 million deaths annually, mostly among the world's poor. Yet international law currently does little to reduce the massive inequalities that underlie these deaths. This Article offers the first systematic account of the goals and justifications, normative foundations, and potential construction of a proposed new global health treaty, a Framework Convention on Global Health (FCGH), grounded in the human right to health. Already endorsed by the United Nations Secretary-General, the FCGH would reimagine global governance for health, offering a new, post-Millennium Development Goals vision. A global coalition of civil society and academics has formed the Joint Action and Learning Initiative on National and Global Responsibilities for Health (JALI) to advance the FCGH.

The global health and care worker compact: evidence base and policy considerations.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, and recognising the sacrifice of health and care workers alongside discrimination, violence, poor working conditions and other violations of their rights, health and safety, in 2021 the World Health Assembly requested WHO to develop a global health and care worker compact, building on existing normative documentation, to provide guidance to 'protect health and care workers and safeguard their rights'. METHODS: A review of existing international law and other normative documents was conducted. We manually searched five main sets of international instruments: (1) International Labour Organization conventions and recommendations; (2) WHO documents; (3) United Nations (UN) human rights treaties and related documents; (4) UN Security Council and General Assembly resolutions and (5) the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols. We included only legal or other normative documents with a global or regional focus directly addressing or relevant to health and care workers or workers overall. RESULTS: More than 70 documents met our search criteria. Collectively, they fell into four domains, within which we identified 10 distinct areas: (1) preventing harm, encompassing (A) occupational hazards, (B) violence and harassment and (C) attacks in situations of fragility, conflict and violence; (2) inclusivity, encompassing (A) non-discrimination and equality; (3) providing support, encompassing (A) fair and equitable remuneration, (B) social protection and (C) enabling work environments and (4) safeguarding rights, encompassing (A) freedom of association and collective bargaining and (B) whistle-blower protections and freedom from retaliation. DISCUSSION: A robust legal and policy framework exists for supporting health and care workers and safeguarding their rights. Specific human rights, the right to health overall, and other binding and non-binding legal documents provide firm grounding for the compact.However, these existing commitments are not being fully met. Implementing the compact will require more effective governance mechanisms and new policies, in partnership with health and care workers themselves.