Share
Wednesday, November 1, 2006
Share

Nature of the Case

Amparo action alleging lack of production of a vaccine. Direct application of right to health standards enshrined in international treaties. The role of the State as guarantor of health care services. Judicial control of budgetary allocations and execution.

Enforcement of the Decision and Outcomes

During the decision implementation process and until today, the Court of Appeals has been remarkably active, monitoring compliance of the measures ordered within the framework of the decision, as well as controlling the management and execution of the budget allocations aimed at producing the vaccine. Production is currently in progress: the vaccine has already been tested in animals and is now being tested in humans.

Significance of the Case

This case shows the positive role the Judiciary can play in monitoring public policies, as well as budgetary allocations and execution. The decision also reaffirms the State’s role as guarantor of the right to health when certain services or benefits are not profitable or convenient for private providers.

Groups Involved in the Case

Claimant: Mariela Viceconte, supported by Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (www.cels.org.ar)