↓ Skip to main content

Tobacco Control Litigation: Broader Impacts on Health Rights Adjudication

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, January 2021
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Tobacco Control Litigation: Broader Impacts on Health Rights Adjudication
Published in
The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, January 2021
DOI 10.1111/jlme.12011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oscar A. Cabrera, Juan Carballo

Abstract

This paper argues that there are instances in which tobacco control litigation is strengthening the justiciability of the right to health and health-related rights. This is happening in different parts of the world, but in particular in Latin America. In part this is because, to a certain extent, tobacco control litigation based on fundamental rights overcomes the traditional arguments against economic, social and cultural rights adjudication: the anti-democratic argument, the lack of technical competency argument, the problem of the misallocation of scarce public resources and the problem of the implementation of judicial decisions. As we analyzed in this paper, tobacco control cases based on fundamental rights are allowing courts to elaborate on broader standards of judicial adjudication of social rights, e.g., expand notions of standing, progressive realization, and state obligations enshrined in the right to health. Key to this judicial trend is the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which provides a legal standard - supported by scientific evidence - defining concrete measures states should take to address the tobacco epidemic, and thus giving content to the right to health as it relates to tobacco control.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 5 20%
Unknown 8 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 7 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 16%
Arts and Humanities 2 8%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 7 28%