Extract
[...] It also relies on political choices, particularly in reducing social inequalities and fighting against discrimination in access to care. It is against these criteria that the concrete reality of the right to health is evaluated, beyond declarations of intent. B. Systemic inequalities hindering universal access to care The right to health is today enshrined in positive law. As such, it cannot be limited to a simple formal recognition; its effectiveness requires a concrete application that can guarantee real access to care for the entire population. [...]
[...] However, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights has recognized, by combining Articles 2 (right to life) and 3 (prohibition of inhuman treatment), that serious failures in access to care can engage the responsibility of States, particularly with regard to vulnerable persons (ECHR, 2012, Nitecki v. Poland). This reasoning highlights that inequalities in access to care can be an infringement on fundamental rights. Ultimately, these inequalities reveal that the effectiveness of the right to health depends less on its legal recognition than on the system's ability to ensure real access to all. They question the ability of States to recognize each individual as a legitimate beneficiary of this right, a fully recognized patient by the healthcare system. [...]
[...] Four criteria are essential to the effective realization of the right to health : - Availability: There must be a sufficient number of facilities, qualified personnel, medicines, and equipment to meet the needs of the population. - Accessibility: Health services must be physically, economically, and legally accessible to all people, without discrimination. Accessibility also implies the right to health information. - Acceptability: Care must respect medical ethics, cultural beliefs, and the dignity of individuals. - Quality: Health services must be based on up-to-date scientific data, delivered in safe conditions, by properly trained personnel. [...]
[...] This is precisely the legal function of the patient. In this perspective, the patient is not only a passive beneficiary of care, but a actor recognized in the healthcare system, equipped with its own guarantees: right to information, right to free and informed consent, right to confidentiality, right to respect for his will, right to continuity of care. This evolution has been built progressively, both at the international and national levels. International texts such as the PIDESC (art. the interpretations of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, or even the charters of theWHO recognize that every person receiving care has a set of fundamental rights. [...]
[...] In fact, in its 2025 global report, the World Health Organization warns that « social injustice continues to kill on a large scale », so much in high-income countries as in low-income countries. It identifies, among the causes of these inequalities, the determinants of health such that housing, education, employment, environment or social protection and (WHO, 2025). For example, in France, a significant proportion of the population declares having renounced care for economic or geographical reasons (DREES, 2022) 1. These difficulties concern, in particular, populations living in rural territories, affected by medical desertification, as well as people in precarious situations. [...]
