Question
In 2016, the UN General Assembly adopted a Resolution on State-provided Health Care . The Resolution expressed total support for the right of all persons,
In 2016, the UN General Assembly adopted aResolution on State-provided Health Care. The Resolution expressed "total support for the right of all persons, however needy, to be provided, directly by their governments, with health care of the highest available quality." It went on to call on all states to "institute, without further delay, comprehensive systems of government- delivered universal health care" forallpersons within their jurisdictions.Several states, including several major states, spoke out strongly against the Resolution, but after a vote it was adopted by a large majority (181 in favour, 5 opposed, 8 abstentions). One delegate gave a speech proclaiming that "the Resolution represents a significant development in international public health law" and the UN General Assembly had instituted "a firm global commitment to universal government-delivered health for all."
The positions of States X, Y and Z on this matter are as follows:
State Xvotedin favour of the Resolution. It issued a statement which praised the Resolution as "a statement of international law." However, it went on to say that "certainunfortunate and unavoidable economic constraints preclude the government of State X from implementing the Resolution immediately." The statement continued: "When the economic climate is sufficiently improved, State X undertakes to give prompt and full effect to the terms of the Resolution."
State Yalsovoted in favour of the Resolution. It also, however,expressed concern about the compatibility of the Resolution with a pre-existing treaty obligation, whichcommitted it to safeguarding "the right of private enterprise to play the predominant role in health-care delivery" in State Y.
State Zvoted against the Resolution. In a statement, it noted that "the government of State Z is of the opinion that the resolution is utopian and aspirational, and consequently is wholly devoid of legal significance."
To what extent, if any, is EACH of these states (X, Y, and Z) legally bound by the contents of the Resolution? In each case, explain the reasons for your conclusion.
All sources must be properly referenced and there should be an appended bibliography of all of the sources consulted.
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
Step: 1
Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions
See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success
Step: 2
Step: 3
Ace Your Homework with AI
Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance
Get Started