Search

This article aims to understand the limitations in enforcing state responsibility on a state of Origin for Trans boundary harm caused by a health emergency by analyzing the factors of force majeure, multiparty involvement, and inability to provide reparations, and the unclear source of the virus as the chief hindrances in prosecuting such states. The authors further explore the various conditions that triggered other PHEICs in history and the consequences and actions taken due to the trans-boundary harm caused. Furthermore, the article also studies the conditions that gave rise to the wet markets and traces the shortcomings in law that hurt the Origin of the virus. After that, the article studies how countries have failed to invoke the state responsibility of trans-boundary harm caused by a PHEIC. Lastly, the article further delves into how Chinese authorities blame both pre and post-outbreak and examine how the global community can negotiate with China for adequate compensation.

The 2020 Amendment Act, of Medical Termination of Pregnancy has reinvigorated the discussion with regards to bodily autonomy and reproductive rights in India. This comes at a juncture of time, where the discussion regarding reproductive rights is an important part of the global socio-political narrative. The aim of this paper is to study the developmental trajectory of reproductive rights by gauging how the right to abortion has fared in various countries across the world by analysing specific legislations, judicial precedents and statistical data. We examine how one may secure the reproductive health rights of a woman better by analysing the two functional methods adopted thus far - either through liberal legislations that guarantee full autonomy to the woman or more restrictive laws that permit abortions only in certain circumstances - a major. The second half of this paper focuses on India, a country whose culture is traditionally perceived to be deeply rooted in orthodoxy and conservatives. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act was enacted in 1971, and the 2020 Amendment has garnered acclaim for its more progressive outlook and direction. Even though the amendment has addressed some of the major concerns voiced out by reproductive rights’ activists, there are still a few systemic and practical dogmas that are still pervasive in the reproductive rights domain. The paper discusses these prevalent lacunae at play at length and emphasizes on the need for comprehensive and quick solutions. These will contribute to the prevention of unwanted pregnancies while simultaneously reducing the physical and psychological harm that is caused to vulnerable women across the country.