Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vsgnj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T13:26:03.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Re-evaluating the Freedom of Scientific Inquiry Through Biotechnology and Human Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

George P. Smith II*
Affiliation:
Catholic University of America, Washington, DC

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Biotechnology, Human Rights, and Intellectual Property
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2002

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 George P. Smith, II, Human Rights and Bigmedicine 20-24 (2000).

2 H.R. 2505, 107th Cong. (2001).

3 See generally, George P. Smith, II, the New Biology: Law, Ethics and Biotechnology (1989).

4 See George P. Smith, II, Restricting the Concept of Free Seas: Modern Maritime Law Re-Evaluated; 1980).

5 Convention on Biological Diversity, June 5, 1992, 31 ILM 822 (1992).

6 See Schnier, David J., Genetically Modified Organisms and the Cartagena Protocol, 12 Fordham Envtl. L.J. 377 (2001)Google Scholar.

7 Gulati, Chetan, The Tragedy of the Commons in Plant Genetic Resources: The Need for a New International Regime Centered Around an International Biotechnology Patent office, 4 Yale Hum. Rts. & Dev. L. J. 63 (2001)Google Scholar.

8 Id. at 84.

9 Id. at 63.

10 Hamm, Brigitte I., A Human Rights Approach to Development, 23 Hum. Rts. Q. 1005 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 George J. Annas, Some Choice: Law, Medicine and the Market 257 (1998).

12 Id.

13 Id.

14 Id. at 257. See also Smith, George P. II, Setting Limits: Medical Technology and the Law, 23 Sydney L. Rev. 283 (2001)Google Scholar; Smith, George P. II, Judicial Decisionmaking in the Age of Biotechnology, 13 Notre Dame J.L. Ethics & Pub. Poly 93 (1999)Google Scholar.