Caselaw Database - All Cases

ESCR-Net Caselaw Database: A database on domestic, regional and international decisions regarding Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

In 1991, the Philippines delegated responsibility for “people’s health and safety” to the local level. In exercise of this power, an executive order 003 (“EO 003”) was issued in Manila, in 2000 which declared that the city would take an “affirmative stand on pro-life issues”. In response to a joint submission from NGOs in 2008, the UN Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women (Committee) conducted an inquiry into alleged human rights violations resulting from the enforcement of EO 003.  

An Afghan citizen (Mr. M.S.S.) presented an asylum application in Belgium after entering the EU through Greece. Pursuant to the Dublin Regulations (EU law that determines which country has responsibility for processing specific asylum petitions), Belgium transferred him back to Greece in order for Greece to process the asylum petition. Greece detained the applicant in degrading conditions and then released him into the country to await a decision on his application. During this time, Mr. M.S.S. was homeless, not permitted to work, and had no access to sanitary facilities or any resources.

In 2006, Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ), an organization member of the ESCR-Net, filed an amparo action against the Government of the City of Buenos Aires. The purpose of the action was to have the Court order the Government to comply with its existing constitutional obligation to ensure and finance access to early education. The case centered on violations of the right to education and to equality, as well as the principle of personal autonomy.

Patricia Mansilla Martínez, a member of Bolivian Parliament, filed an abstract action of unconstitutionality against articles 56, 58, 245, 250, 254, 258, 263, 264, 265, 266, 269, 315, and 327 of the Criminal Code for discrimination against women. The Court did not consider the constitutionality of articles 254, 315 or 317, as they are no longer in force.

Three Namibian women, all HIV positive, sued the government, claiming that they had been sterilized at  public hospitals without their consent after giving birth via Caesarean section.

Liliane Gröninger presented the communication before the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on behalf of herself, her husband and her son, Erhard Gröninger, a person with disabilities.   Mrs. Gröninger argues Germany violated Article 3 (General principles), Article 4 (General obligations), Article 8 (Awareness –raising) and Article 27 (Work and employment) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (The Convention), through legislation that failed to promote Mr. Gröninger participation in the labor marker.

On December 20, 2012, three patients of the National Institute of Respiratory Diseases “Ismael Cosío Villegas” (INER) brought the indirect amparo action 1669/2012 against various authorities held responsible, including  the National Commission of Social Protection in Health, the Technical Committee of the Trust for the System of Social Protection in Health and the National Institute of Respiratory Diseases “Ismael Cosío Villegas” (INER), for the failure of said authorities to take all necessary measures to guarantee and implement the patients’ right to the enjoyment of the highest attainabl

This case concerns a municipality’s efforts to remove residents from land it had deemed to be a “local state of disaster” pursuant to the Disaster Management Act (“DMA”), which was intended to provide municipalities with flexibility in urgently responding to disaster-stricken areas when such action is necessary for the preservation of life.  Upon learning of their impending removal, the residents challenged the eviction, arguing that the removal was unlawful under the Constitution’s guarantees of the right to housing and certain statutory provisions.  The reside

Following a newspaper report regarding a destitute woman who died on a busy street four days after giving birth to a baby girl, the Court brought this public interest litigation (PIL) on its own motion. The Court also asked the Human Rights Law Network (HRLN), an ESCR-Net member organization, to file an amicus brief on the status of maternal health for destitute pregnant and lactating women in Delhi, and to suggest appropriate remedies. HRLN’s amicus outlined myriad state failures to implement government schemes providing for food and health services to women and marginalized groups.

In 2007, petitioners brought a case seeking mandamus to enforce obligations of women’s reproductive health rights under Article 20 (2) of the Interim Constitution and international human rights treaties to which Nepal is party. Petitioners argued that despite budgetary allotments by the government, no meaningful or effective programs had been initiated by the State to address the problem of uterine prolapse, as evidenced by the hundreds of thousands of women suffering from the condition.