Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T14:08:44.033Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experiments on Human Beings and International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2009

Matthus de Blois
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments on human beings are often beneficial for mankind in general and individuals in particular. They may, however, also present a threat to the right to the personal integrity. Existing provisions of the international law on human rights as well as of humanitarian law are instruments to protect this right against certain forms of experimentation. They leave, therefore, many questions open. Several non-binding texts give suggestions to answer them. They are also useful as materials for an international convention to protect human beings against unwarranted experimentation.

Type
Leading Articles
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , April 1990 , pp. 18 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See Le Monde, Nov. 20, 1985, at 19–20.

2. Published in The Association of Lawyers for the Defence of the Unborn, News and Comment, Autumn 1989, No. 43, at 3–5.

3. Robertson, A.H. (ed.), Ill Colleted Edition of the Travaux Preparatoires’ of the European Convention on Human Rights 206 (The Hague 1975–1985).Google Scholar

4. Th. Buergenthal & Norris, R.E Human Rights, The Inter-American System 48 (Booklet 16.1).Google Scholar

5. Decision on the admissibility in Case 9974/82, D.& R. 32, at 282–283.

6. Code of Nuremberg, VTJ Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals 49–53. Also published in: 1947 Annual Digest and Reports of Public International Law Cases 297–298.

7. This version of the Helsinki Declaration can be found in Council of Europe, Information Sheet No. 14 (Nov. 1983-Mar. 1984) H/INF(4), at 93–96.

8. See 51 Revue Internationale de droit penal 419–443 (1980).

9. See Principal Developments, 1983 Y.B. Eur. Conv. On Hum. Rts. 52–56 (1983).

10. See OJ. 1989, C 96/165, 171.

11. Cf. M. de Blois, Het Recht op de Persoonlijke Integriteit in net Internationale Recht 162–163 (1989) and M. Bossuyt, Guide to the ‘Travaux Preparatoires’ of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 151–158 (1987).

12. Boven, Th. vanThe Future Codification on Human Rights, Status of Deliberations - A Critical Analysis, 10 HRLJ, No. 1–2, at 1–11 (1989).Google Scholar

13. Blois, M. desupra note 11, at 55–64;Google ScholarEsser, W.Can Abortion Be Legally Justified, 1984 Medicine and Law 205–216;Google ScholarDesch, Th.The Concept and Dimensions of the Right to Life, 36 österreichische Zeitschrift für Öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 89–97 (1985).Google Scholar

14. See, e.g., Lejeune, J.Le Debat de I'Etre Humain, in L'Embryon: un Homme, Actes du Congres de Lausanne 1986 (de la Societe“ Suisse de Bioéthique) 173–186.Google Scholar

15. Blois, M. desupra note 11, at 164–165;Google ScholarBossuyt, Msupra note 11, at 151–158.Google Scholar

16. This is the conclusion drawn by EB. van der Veen, Het betrekken van incompetemen in experimenlen, Tijdschrift voor Gezondheidsrecht, Dec. 1989, at 550.

17. Arts. 12 and 51 common to the First and Second Convention. See also Art. 30 of the Third Convention.

18. Final Record of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva (1949), vol. II, section A, 191.

19. Art. 13 of the Third Convention.

20. Pictet, J. Commentary I, Geneva Convention, 139 (1952); Id. Commentary II, Geneva Convention 91 (1960); Id., Commentary ID, Geneva Convention 140–141 (1960); Id. Commentary IV, Geneva Convention 224 (1958).Google Scholar

21. Blois, M. desupra note 11, at 170–174 and Bossuyt, M.supra note 11, at 151–158.Google Scholar

22. Art. 7 of the Fust, Second and Third Convention. Cf. Pictet, J. Commentary I, Geneva Convention, 77–85 (1952).Google Scholar

23. Pictet, J.supra note 22, at 80.Google Scholar

24. Blois, M. desupra note 11, at 170–174 and Bossuyt, M.supra note 11, at 151–158.Google Scholar

25. Supra note 6, Point 1.

26. Supra note 7, Point 1(9–11).

27. Draft Convention, supra note 8, Arts. 1(2), 3(1) and 3(2); Draft Principles, supra note 8, Arts. 2, 4, 5 and 6; Guidelines, supra note 8, Arts. 10–13.

28. Blois, M. desupra note 11, at 175;Google ScholarBossuyt, M.supra note 11 at 151–158.Google Scholar

29. Cf. the discussion on the first Mexican report CCPR/C/SR. 386, at 7 and on the first Dutch report CCPR/C/5R. 325, at 5. See also the first report of Portugal CCPRJC/6/Add. 6, at 28–29 and Poland CCPR/ C/4/Add. 4, at 9 and the second report of Denmark CCPR/C/37/Add. 5, at 6 and of Tunesia CCPR/C/28/ Add. 5/rev. 1, at 21.

30. See A/37/40, at 95.

31. CCPR/C/SR. 371, at 4.

32. Supra note 6, Point 1.

33. See Mitford, J. Kind and Unusual Punishment, The Prison Business 139 (1974).Google Scholar

34. Blois, M. desupra note 11, at 186;Google ScholarBossuyt, M.supra note 11, at 151–158.Google Scholar

35. Cf. the Ethical Review Committee mentioned in the first report of Sri Lanka CCPR/C/14/Add. 4, at 6; See also the first report of Mexico CCPR/C/22/Add.l, at 11 and the discussion on the Dutch report CCPR/C/SR.321, at 5.

36. Nuremberg supra note 6, point 2; Draft Principles, supra note 8, Art 7.

37. Nuremberg supra note 6, point 3; Helsinki, supra note 7, point 1(1) and 11(3); Draft Principles, supra note 8, Art. 8.

38. Nuremberg supra note 6, point 8; Helsinki, supra note 7, point 1(3); Draft Principles, supra note 8, Art. 13.

39. Helsinki supra note 7, point 1(7).

40. Helsinki supra note 7, point 1(5) and 111(4); , Nurembergsupra note 6, point 6;Google Scholar, Helsinkisupra note 7, point 1(4 and 7), 11(2 and 6); Draft Principles, supra note 8, Arts. 10 and 15.Google Scholar

41. Nuremberg supra note 6, point 4; Draft Principles, supra note 8, Art. 12.

42. Nuremberg supra note 6, point 7; Draft Principles, note 8, Art 11.

43. Nuremberg, supra note 6, point 5; Draft Principles, supra note 8, Art 9.

44. Helsinki, supra note 7, point 1(6); Draft Principles, supra note 8, Art 17.

45. Helsinki, supra note 7, point 1(2 and 8).

46. See, e.g., Rec. 1100 §§ 5–6 (1989).