We are going to take China for COVID-19 before the International Court of Justice – News Block

image of the international court

The scholars argued that China’s actions in relation to COVID-19 (and the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2), especially with the reporting and timing responsibilities set out in Articles 6 and 7, violated the International Health Regulations ( see, for example, , here and here).

If China had followed through on these commitments, the current case of COVID-19 would likely be exponentially lower. This leads another scholar to declare, “China can and should be sued for the massive losses it has caused the world, and alert China to the arrival of lawyers. However, all of these authors share one thing: they do not recognize precedent. to hold China accountable for these violations by a foreign court or tribunal.

Pursuant to Article 56 of the International Health Law, at least two researchers have pointed to a dispute resolution mechanism (see here and here), but such a mechanism does so only if China accepts that it is, of course, highly unlikely.

However, there is one authority that is overlooked: Article 75 of the WHO Constitution. Article 75 establishes: any question or controversy regarding or not addressed in the conversations or in the health assembly on the interpretation or application of this Constitution, will be referred to the ICC…

In fact, the Court itself accepted that the jurisdiction of the Court (Armed Practices, Jurisprudence and Admissibility), Decision, paragraphs of article 75 of the WHO Constitution. (10). Furthermore, if the Court considered Article 75 as Article 22 of the CERD (Ukraine v. Russia, preliminary objections, decision, paragraph 113), then a State does not proceed to the World Health Assembly until it meets the requirements of negotiation so that it can sue China before the Court.

The more difficult question is how does a state frame its argument about Chinese actions as interpreter or enforcement of the WHO Constitution? It does not appear that the WHO Constitution includes significant responsibilities under international health law. Rather, the key consideration is, as the name implies, the creation of a legislative system, which addresses concerns such as membership and institutional structure.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top