Human rights organisations welcome Zambia’s confirmation of informed consent to HIV testing and treatment

10 October 2017 · AfricanLII

The AIDS and Rights Alliance for Southern Africa (ARASA) and Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC) welcomed the clarification by Dr. Chitalu Chilufya, Zambian Minister of Health, during a live interview on Sunday, 20 August 2017, that the expansion of provider-initiated HIV testing and adoption of test-and-treat will be continued with due respect for the right to informed consent.

“We were gravely concerned by last week’s announcement by Zambian President Edgar Lungu that HIV testing, counselling and treatment would be compulsory in Zambia for any person seeking medical treatment in public healthcare facilities,” said Michaela Clayton, Director of ARASA. “The right to make a decision to test for HIV based on informed consent is protected by human rights law, but is also crucial from a public health perspective, as it enables people to act on the knowledge they obtain through the test.”

The majority of people living with HIV in southern Africa do not know their status, which poses a serious threat to achieving the 90-90-90 targets of the United Nations Joint Programme on HIV and AIDS (UNAIDS), which set out to ensure that 90 percent of all people living with HIV know their HIV status, 90 percent of people with diagnosed HIV infection receive sustained combination antiretroviral treatment (ART) and 90 percent of all people receiving ART have viral suppression.

This realisation has often resulted in considerations for more aggressive responses, in which certain human rights protections are suspended or restricted for the benefit of the greater good - pitting a “rights-based” approach against a “public health” approach. However, the protection of human rights in the context of HIV has been proven to be crucial for HIV prevention and treatment outcomes.

Mandatory HIV testing is not only illegal and unconstitutional under Zambian law, it would also be contrary to international standards and guidelines on HIV testing and treatment. Research has found that forcing people to test for HIV or to take HIV treatment is unnecessary and counter-productive as it creates a disincentive to voluntarily access healthcare services and may push people away from testing and finding out their status.

“Enforcing a policy that violates human rights to informed consent would have been unconstitutional and would have forced healthcare workers to violate professional ethical standards, which could have exposed them to legal liability,” said Anneke Meerkotter, Litigation Director at SALC.

This position has been confirmed by both the Supreme Court[1] and the High Court in Zambia who found that HIV testing and the taking or administering of HIV or related treatments or therapies, like all other medical procedures, should only be conducted with the free, voluntary and informed consent of the individual[2] and that consent is only present if it is provided freely, without undue influence, coercion, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake.[3]

ARASA and SALC are encouraged that the Ministry of Health recognizes the potential harms of a mandatory testing policy and urge the Zambian government to focus on creating an environment in which people voluntarily seek to know their status by addressing stigma and discrimination, gender-based violence and other structural challenges that create barriers to access to HIV prevention services.

The Zambian government should facilitate and support healthcare providers to implement comprehensive, quality informed consent procedures in line with the key principles of consent, confidentiality, counselling, correct results, and connection to HIV prevention, treatment and care according to the WHO consolidated guidelines on HIV testing services.

This is a media statement issued by the AIDS and Rights Alliance for Southern Africa (ARASA). To view the original statement, click here.

AfricanLII

About the author

Recent articles by AfricanLII

Inaugural meeting and conference of African Network of Judicial Trainers

24 January 2024
AfricanLII

The work of the Judicial Institute for Africa (Jifa) and the African Legal Information Institute (AfricanLII) was showcased at this week’s inaugural three-day AGM and conference of the African Network of Judicial Trainers (ANJT), held in Zanzibar. A number of important projects were launched or unveiled at the event, including an inaugural project to draw up a shared ethics manual on judicial training for trainers.

Pocket Law: Legal Information In Your Pocket

23 January 2023
AfricanLII

Do your users struggle to connect to the Internet? Pocket Law lets you search for cases and legislation off-line. It is a USB stick loaded with an LII website, which works off-line and updates with new content once users are in Internet coverage.

Pocket Law

23 January 2023
AfricanLII

The Community Land Act in Kenya Opportunities and Challenges for Communities

15 December 2021
AfricanLII

Kenya is the most recent African state to acknowledge customary tenure as producing lawful property rights, not merely rights of occupation and use on government or public lands. This paper researches this new legal environment. This promises land security for 6 to 10 million Kenyans, most of who are members of pastoral or other poorer rural communities. Analysis is prefaced with substantial background on legal trends continentally, but the focus is on Kenya’s Community Land Act, 2016, as the framework through which customary holdings are to be identified and registered. A main conclusion is that while Kenya’s law is positive and even cutting-edge in respects, legal loopholes place communities at risk of their lands not being as secure as promised ahead of formalization, and at risk of losing some of their most valuable lands during the formalization process. This is mainly due to overlapping claims by the national and local government authorities. Political will to apply the law is also weak. The truism that the law is never enough on its own to secure social change is illustrated. With or without legal protection, the assistance of non-state actors will be needed to help communities secure their lands under formal collective entitlements. The need for judicial interpretation of disputed legal provisions may also be required to ensure new constitutional principles are delivered.

Kenya and Botswana: why were their recent sodomy judgments so different?

2 March 2020
AfricanLII

In this post from the website of the International Association of Constitutional Law , blogger Aditendra Singh of the National Law University, Delhi, compares two similar cases from Kenya and Botswana. He poses the question: What made the courts adjudicate the matters so differently?