Enforcement/Implementation of ESCR

Primary tabs

Caselaw

Una de las funciones de la Corte Constitucional de Colombia es revisar las acciones de tutela. La Corte revisa todos los años una pequeña porción de las más de trescientas mil acciones de tutela resueltas por los tribunales inferiores; el 36% de dichas acciones se relacionan con el derecho a la salud, según datos proporcionados para 2005 por la Oficina de la Defensoría del Pueblo de Colombia. La sentencia T-760 de 2008 acumuló 22 acciones de tutela.

The Colombian Constitutional Court has among its functions the review of tutela actions. The Court annually reviews a small proportion of the more than 300,000 tutela actions resolved by lower judges; 36% of which are related to the right to health according to data of the Colombian Ombudsman's Office for 2005. Decision T-760 of 2008 accumulated 22 of these cases. However, the Court did not limit itself to reviewing and resolving these individual cases.

La ciudad de Johannesburgo buscaba desalojar a hombres, mujeres y niños de dos edificios en el centro de la ciudad de Berea. Esta medida formaba parte de una política general de evacuación formulada bajo la Estrategia de Regeneración del Centro de la Ciudad de Johannesburgo, en la que los desalojos se llevaban a cabo de noche y sin aviso previo, conforme a leyes y disposiciones del régimen del Apartheid. La ciudad adujo que las condiciones de vida no eran higiénicas y creaban peligros de incendio, pero se negó a ofrecer a los ocupantes viviendas alternativas.

The state of Punjab enacted a law to prevent rickshaw pullers from being exploited by middlemen. It created a program whereby rickshaw pullers would be given an interest-free loan to buy their own rickshaws, and the state issued licenses to the owners to make sure the law was enforced.  Only the owners could pull the newly purchased rickshaws, and licenses would not be issued or would be revoked if the state learned that someone else was pulling the rickshaw.

The City of Johannesburg sought to evict men, women and children from two buildings in Berea, in the inner city. This was part of an overall clearance policy under the Johannesburg Inner City Regeneration Strategy, in which evictions have been carried out in the middle of the night and without notice, under Apartheid-era laws and regulations. The city alleged that the living conditions are unhygienic and constitute a fire hazard, but had refused to offer the occupiers alternative accommodation.

The claimant, Thiagraj Soobramoney, suffered from chronic renal failure (among other diseases) and was in dire need of renal dialysis in order to stave off death. When he ran out of personal funds with which to pay private providers, he sought service in Addington Hospital, a state-funded hospital in Durban. The hospital refused Soobramoney treatment because his general physical condition did not qualify him for treatment under the criteria or guidelines used by the hospital to determine eligibility for such treatments.

In 1998, the Aboriginal Communities Association Lhaka Honat filed an action with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) against the State of Argentina. The communities living in Salta province denounced violations of their right to ancestral land, to cultural integrity and to a safe environment, following the State’s decision to build an international bridge and carry out an urban development plan in their territory, which would significantly alter their way of life.

Mariela Viceconte filed a collective amparo action seeking to force the Argentine State to produce the Candid 1 vaccine. Her case was based on her own right to health and that of other persons exposed to contracting “Argentine Hemorrhagic Fever,” including in Argentina approximately 3.5 million people. The action specifically alleged a violation of the obligation to prevent, treat and fight epidemic and endemic diseases arising from article 12.2.c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

Jeannine Godin vivía en condiciones de pobreza y dependía de la asistencia social. El Ministerio de Salud y Servicios Sociales tenía la custodia de sus tres hijos por seis meses y solicitaba extender el plazo por otros seis meses. Godin solicitó asesoramiento jurídico gratuito para que un abogado la represente en la audiencia, pero le fue denegado, porque tal asesoramiento no estaba previsto para casos de custodia temporaria.

Conforme a los artículos 20 y 21 de la Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act (Ley de Terrenos Urbanos (Tope y Reglamentación)) de 1976, el gobierno estatal puede otorgar excepciones al tope cuando los terrenos se utilicen para construir viviendas para alojar a los ‘segmentos más débiles de la sociedad'. Se adujo que los constructores no habían cumplido con esta condición. Aunque entendió que la demanda se había vuelto infructuosa, el Alto Tribunal de Bombay ordenó varias medidas relacionadas con el monitoreo futuro del plan dispuesto por el artículo 20.