Religious and Spiritual Rights in Health
Asghar Arabian; Mohammadreza Alipour; Maryam Haidari
Volume 2, Issue 2 , February 2025, , Pages 17-30
Abstract
Background and Objective: Health is known as one of the main pillars of development and one of human rights. Therefore, governments are obliged to realize the right to health of their citizens. Judicial and quasi-judicial mechanisms sieve as important avenves for individual to pursue this right, and ...
Read More
Background and Objective: Health is known as one of the main pillars of development and one of human rights. Therefore, governments are obliged to realize the right to health of their citizens. Judicial and quasi-judicial mechanisms sieve as important avenves for individual to pursue this right, and their incorporation into legal framework is essential. The involvement of experts in health and criminal sciences.Methods: With scientific methods, the analysis and recognition of the right to health in national and international law has been done and provide practical solutions to help improve the monitoring and handling of the violation of the right to health in Iran.Results: Based on international documents, all the governments are committed to the health rights of their citizens. Therefore, the governments put cases of violations of this right under judicial review at two levels: Violation of the right to health by 1- Healthcare professionals, 2- The government; Therefore, both of them are responsibl.Conclusion: Success in judicial and quasi-judicial processes depends on the implementation of international obligations related to the right to health by governments. The right to health should be the first priority of the laws of the countries; And among other things, it should be accurately and clearly considered in the constitution, and it should be linked with the more fundamental right to life. However, achiving this right presents significant challenges, such as broad scope of health rights, the need for clear definitions of their limits, insufficient expertise among profesionals involved, inadequate judicial evaluations, and funding limitations.
