Revisiting Restrictions on Rights After COVID-19
by Leonard Rubenstein and Matthew DeCamp // Volume 22/2, December 2020, pp 321 – 324
The Siracusa Principles have had a good run over the past 35 years.[1] The public health provisions of the principles, which contain criteria for limiting civil and political rights to advance various public purposes, have offered governments standards for acceptable restrictions on rights to reduce the spread of infectious disease. They require that restrictions be based on a legitimate aim, law, and necessity; evidence-based; the least-restrictive choice; non-discriminatory; and arrived at through a participatory and transparent process. In particular, restrictions must not disproportionately harm marginalized or vulnerable populations or discriminate against them. The standards have proven durable as a human rights approach to controlling outbreaks and sensible from a public health standpoint.