Abstract
The purpose of the article is to assess how the provisions resulting from international programmatic norms in the field of human genetic data are implemented. The presented study, adopting the perspective of institutional rationalism extended to the paradigm of legalism, considers examples of the implementation of these standards in selected legal systems – Germany, the United States of America and France. The selection of the research paradigm is preceded by a theoretical introduction, which presents three ways of conceptualizing the notion of soft law in the legal sciences. Following an outline of this legal regime in positivism, and the theories of rationalization and constructivism, the author focuses on the provisions of the International Declaration on Human Genetic Data of 16 October, 2003, which are compared with the legislative initiatives of Germany, the United States of America and France, to show the influence that the choices of states has on selection of the implemented standards and how they are implemented.
References
Abbott K.W., Keohane R.O., Moravcsik A., Slaughter A.M., Snidal D., The Concept of Legalization, “International Organization” 2000, vol. 54, issue 3.
Adler E., Constructivism and International Relations Theory, in Handbook of International Relations, eds. W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, B. Simmons, London 2002.
Bovenberg J.A., Property rights in Blood, Genes and Data. Naturally yours?, Leiden – Boston 2006.
Exter A. den et al., International health law and ethics, Apeldoorn – Antwerp – Portland 2009.
Guzman A., The Design of International Agreements, “The European Journal of International Law” 2005, vol. 16, no. 4.
Hillgenberg H., A Fresh Look at Soft Law, “European Journal of International Law” 1999, no. 3.
Lipson C., Why Are Some International Agreements Informal?, “International Organization” 1991.
Kingsbury B., The Concept of Compliance as a Function of Competing Conceptions of International Law, “Michigan Journal of International Law” 1998, vol. 19.
Reinicke W., Witte J.M., Interdependence,Globalization, and Sovereignty: The Role of Non-binding International Legal Accords, in Commitment and Compliance: The Role of Non-Binding Norms in the International Legal System, ed. D. Shelton, Oxford 2003.
Ruggie J., What Makes The World Hang Together, “International Organization” 1998, no. 3.
Snyder F., Soft Law and International Practice in the European Community, in The Construction of Europe: Essays in Honour of Emile Noël, ed. S. Martin, Dordrecht 1994.
Trubek D., Cottrell P., Nance M., Soft Law, Hard Law and European Integration: Toward a Theory of Hybridity, “University of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper” 2005, no. 1002.
Serour G.I., Ragab A.R.A., Ethics of genetic counselling, in The SAGE Handbook of Health Care Ethics, eds. R. Chadwick, H. ten Have, E.M. Meslin, London 2011.
Symonides J., Międzynarodowe instrumenty prawne w dziedzinie bioetyki i biotechnologii, in Prawa człowieka wobec rozwoju biotechnologii, Warszawa 2013.
Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act 21 May 2008, 122 stat. 881, Public Law 110-233, May 21, 2008.
Gesetz über Genetische Untersuchungen bei Menschen, 31 April 2009.
International Declaration on Human Genetic Data adopted on 16 October 2003 by the 32 Session of the General Conference of UNESCO.