Effective and full implementation of the right to health framework, including justiciability of ESCR and the right to health; the progressive realisation of the right to health; the accountability deficit of transnational corporations; and the current ... 2014, para. 27
Paragraph
Paragraph text
Some domestic courts have focused on judicial review of the process, rather than the substance, of policymaking. Courts have confirmed that a State is in compliance with its progressively realizable obligations if the policymaking process was reasonable. The Constitutional Court of South Africa, for example, has considered the following factors in determining whether a housing policy and a water distribution policy was "reasonable": consideration given to vulnerable groups and emergency situations; flexibility of the policy to being updated upon continuing governmental review; attention paid to the short-term, medium-term and long-term needs; a transparent, participatory and well-considered process; efficient implementation of the policy; equitable coverage; retrogression in policy; and whether discrimination was tied to a legitimate government policy. Even where adjudicators find that the process has been reasonable, they may also review whether the implementation of the policy has resulted in a disproportionately negative impact on a particular vulnerable group, which may evidence a breach of the State's progressively realizable obligations.
Legal status
Non-negotiated soft law
Body
Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health
Document type
Special Procedures' report
Means of adoption
N.A.
Topic(s)
Governance & Rule of Law
Humanitarian
Person(s) affected
All
Year
2014
Paragraph type
Other
Reference
SR Health, Report to the UNGA (2014), A/69/299, para. 27.