![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper argues that the principal human rights and policy concerns that have been raised over criminalisation of HIV exposure or transmission since the early days of the epidemic cannot be neatly addressed within the traditional criminal law framework. Public health structures may be better placed, in terms of both their mandate and their structure, to incorporate lessons from the public health and human rights movement. This paper critically explores the potential of emerging models of structured coordination between public health and criminal law actors with a view to a more targeted, human-rights-sensitive application of criminal law to the sexual behaviours of people living with HIV. Finally, it assesses these emerging approaches from new governance and restorative justice perspectives.
Acknowledgements
The author gratefully acknowledges the support and contributions of members of the Faculties of Law at McGill University and the University of Ottawa, participants at conferences including the McGill/Queen's University Junior Scholars' Conference and the University of British Columbia's ‘Standard Margins, Contemporary Issues in Law and Sexuality in Canada’ conference, as well as the groups of individuals living with HIV/AIDS in Montreal and Toronto who provided useful feedback on earlier versions of this paper. Individual acknowledgements are owed to Gerald Neuman, Richard Elliott, Glenn Betteridge, Richard Pearshouse, Sandra Ka Hon Chu, Alison Symington, Edwin J. Bernard, Robert James, Matthew Weait, and Catherine Hanssens as well as the anonymous reviewers who provided invaluable comments on this article. Special thanks go to Megan Howatt and Anne Merminod for their exceptional research assistance, and Phil C.W. Chan for his infinite patience and detailed editing.
Notes
See, e.g., S. Bronitt, ‘Spreading Disease and the Criminal Law’, Criminal Law Review 21 (1994): 22; J. Chalmers, ‘The Criminalization of HIV Transmission’, Journal of Medical Ethics 28, no. 3 (2002): 160; J.M. Dwyer, ‘Legislating AIDS Away: The Limited Role of Legal Persuasion in Minimizing the Spread of HIV’, Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 9 (1993): 167; R. Elliott, Criminal Law and HIV/AIDS: Final Report (Montreal: Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network and Canadian AIDS Society, 1997); Z. Lazzarini, S. Bray, and S. Burris, ‘Evaluating the Impact of Criminal Laws on HIV Risk Behavior’, Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 30 (2002): 239; J.R. Spencer, ‘Liability for Reckless Infection: Part 1’, New Law Journal (March 2004): 384; J.R. Spencer, ‘Liability for Reckless Infection: Part 2’, New Law Journal (March 2004): 448; K.M. Sullivan and M.A. Field, ‘AIDS and the Coercive Power of the State’, Harvard Civil Rights–Civil Liberties Law Review 23 (1988): 139, 197; M. Weait, ‘Criminal Law and the Sexual Transmission of HIV: R. v. Dica’, Modern Law Review 68 (2002): 121; M. Weait, ‘On Being Responsible’, in Sexuality and the Law, ed. V.E. Munro (London: Routledge-Cavendish, 2007), 19; L.E. Wolf and R. Vezina, ‘Crime and Punishment: Is There a Role for Criminal Law in HIV Prevention Policy’, Whittier Law Review 25 (2004): 821, 848.
See generally H. Worth, C. Patton, and M. T. McGehee, ‘Legislating the Pandemic: A Global Survey of HIV/AIDS in Criminal Law’, Sexuality Research and Social Policy 2, no. 2 (2005): 15.
See, e.g., W.H. Holland, ‘HIV/AIDS and the Criminal Law’, Criminal Law Quarterly 36 (1994): 279, 288; Spencer, ‘Reckless Infection: Part 1’; idem, ‘Reckless Infection: Part 2’.
Sullivan and Field, ‘AIDS and the Coercive Power of the State’; Chalmers, ‘The Criminalization of HIV Transmission’; Dwyer, ‘Legislating AIDS Away’; Lazzarini et al., ‘Evaluating the Impact of Criminal Laws on HIV Risk Behavior’; Weait, ‘Criminal Law and the Sexual Transmission of HIV’; Weait, ‘On Being Responsible’; Elliott, Criminal Law and HIV/AIDS; Wolf and Vezina, ‘Crime and Punishment’.
Sullivan and Field, ‘AIDS and the Coercive Power of the State’.
See sources cited in note 1.
See Worth et al., ‘Legislating the Pandemic’; A. Mears, ‘The Criminalisation of HIV Transmission in England and Wales: A Brief Review of the Issues Arising’, Current Opinions in Infectious Diseases 20 (2007): 47.
Spencer, ‘Reckless Infection: Part 1’; idem, ‘Reckless Infection: Part 2’; Holland, ‘HIV/AIDS and the Criminal Law’.
S. Burris, L. Beletsky, J.A. Burleson, P. Case, and Z. Lazzarini, ‘Do Criminal Laws Influence HIV Risk Behavior? An Empirical Trial’, Arizona State Law Journal 39 (2007): 467, 469.
See generally, e.g., J.D. Auerback and T.J. Coates, ‘HIV Prevention Research: Accomplishments and Challenges for the Third Decade of AIDS’, American Journal of Public Health 90, no. 7 (2000): 1029; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, ‘Advancing HIV Prevention: New Strategies for a Changing Epidemic – United States, 2003’, Journal of the American Medical Association 289, no. 19 (2003): 2493; G. Marks, S. Burris, and T.A. Peterman, ‘Reducing Sexual Transmission of HIV From Those Who Know They Are Infected: The Need for Personal and Collective Responsibility’, AIDS 13, no. 3 (1999): 297.
Z. Lazzarini and R. Klitzman, ‘HIV and the Law: Integrating Law, Policy, and Social Epidemiology’, Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 30 (2002): 533, 535.
See note 25 below.
Wolf and Vezina, ‘Crime and Punishment’, 857–9.
Chalmers, ‘The Criminalization of HIV Transmission’, describes the conviction of Stephen Kelly for the offence of recklessly causing injury to another person by transmitting HIV to a sexual partner to whom he failed to disclose his HIV-positive status before having unprotected sex.
R. v. Cuerrier [1998] 2 SCR 371.
BBC News, ‘HIV Case Man Jailed for Five Years’, 16 March 2001, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/1223845.stm (accessed 30 November 2008).
R. v. Dica [2004] QB 1257.
Section 78 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (c.100) provides that the Act does not apply in Scotland.
See Mears, ‘The Criminalisation of HIV Transmission in England and Wales’, 49. The author lists the convictions of Stephen Kelly (2001), Mohammed Dica (2003), Kouassi Adaye (2004), Feston Konzani (2005); Paulo Matias (2005), an anonymous Welsh woman (2005), Derek Hornett (2005), Mark James (2006), and Sarah Porter (2006). There have been four additional convictions since: see E.J. Bernard, ‘Ninth English HIV Transmission Conviction for Merseyside Man’, AIDSMAP News, 27 September 2006, http://www.aidsmap.com/en/news/9F020C62-89BF-47FA-97AD-88AC2FDE32EB.asp (accessed 12 June 2008); E.J. Bernard, ‘Bournemouth Man Pleads Guilty in Tenth Successfully Prosecuted Reckless HIV Transmission Case in England and Wales’, AIDSMAP News, 18 January 2007, http://www.aidsmap.com/en/news/320C5148-995E-4175-8BAF-5502DEA49930.asp (accessed 10 June 2008); HM Advocate v. Mola, 2007 SCCR 124, www.scotcourts.gov.uk (accessed 30 November 2008); BBC News, ‘Man Jailed for Passing HIV Virus’, BBC News, 21 November 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/lancashire/7743159.stm (accessed 10 December 2008.
According to at least one author, there is a theoretical possibility that prosecution could be brought under Scots law for the offence of reckless endangerment; see J. Chalmers, ‘Sexually Transmitted Diseases and the Criminal Law’, Juridical Review (2001): 266. In England and Wales, prosecution for exposure would not be possible unless one had acted with the intention of transmitting HIV: see National AIDS Trust, ‘Criminal Prosecution of HIV Transmission: NAT Policy Update’, August 2006, http://www.nat.org.uk/document/185 (accessed 16 May 2008).
R. v. Savage; R. v. Parmenter [1992] 1 AC 699 (House of Lords).
For a summary of US state criminal statutes, see American Civil Liberties Union, ‘State Criminal Statutes on HIV Transmission – 2008’, http://www.aclu.org/hiv/gen/34228res20080211.html (accessed 30 November 2008).
US Code, Title 42, s. 300ff-47 (2000).
Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE) Act Amendments of 2000, Public Law No. 106-345, s. 301(a), 114 Stat. 1319.
Arkansas Code Annotated, §. 5, 14, 123; California Health and Safety Code, s. 120291; Florida Statutes Annotated, s. 384.24; Georgia Code Annotated, s. 165-60(c); Idaho Code, ss. 39-608 and 720; Illinois Compiled Statutes, 5/1216.2; Indiana Code Annotated, s. 35-42-1-7; Iowa Code, s. 709C; Louisiana Revised Statutes, s. 3435; Maryland Health Code Annotated Health-General, s. 18-601.1; Michigan Compiled Laws, s. 333.5210; Missouri Revised Statutes, 191.677; Nevada Revised Statutes, s. 21-205; New Jersey Statutes, s. 2C:34-5; North Dakota Century Code Annotated, s. 12; Oklahoma Statutes, 1192.1; 18 Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, s. 2703; South Carolina Code Annotated, s. 4429-145; South Dakota Codified Laws, s. 22-18-31; Tennessee Code Annotated, s. 39-13-109; Virginia Code Annotated, s. 18.2-67, 4:1
See, e.g., Alabama Code Annotated, s. 22-11A21(c); California Health and Safety Code, ss. 120290–1; Kansas Statutes Annotated, s. 21-3435; Montana Code Annotated, s. 50-18-112; New York Public Health Law, s. 2307; Tennessee Code Annotated, s. 68-10-107.
Lazzarini et al., ‘Evaluating the Impact of Criminal Laws on HIV Risk Behavior’, 241.
See, e.g., A. Waldman, ‘Guilty Plea in an HIV Exposure Case’, New York Times, 19 February 1999, B3. The articles reported that Nushawn Williams pleaded guilty to reckless endangerment.
Lazzarini et al., ‘Evaluating the Impact of Criminal Laws on HIV Risk Behavior’, 245.
Ibid.
See, e.g., R. v. Hollihan [1998] NJ No. 176 (Newfoundland Provincial Court); R. v. Kreider (1993) 140 AR. 81 (Alberta Provincial Court).
See, e.g., R. v. Mercer (1993) CCC (3d) 41 (Newfoundland Court of Appeal).
R. v. Cuerrier.
Ibid., para. 128.
See, e.g., R. v. Wentzell, unreported, 8 December 1989, Nova Scotia County Court, file no. CR-10888.
Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, Prosecutions for HIV Transmission and Exposure 1989–2008 (on file with author).
See S. Gruskin, A. Hendriks, and K. Tomasevski, ‘Human Rights and Responses to HIV/AIDS’, in AIDS in the World II: Global Dimensions, Social Roots, and Responses, ed. J.M. Mann and D.J.M. Tarantola (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 326.
See, e.g., Dwyer, ‘Legislating AIDS Away’; Lazzarini et al., ‘Evaluating the Impact of Criminal Laws on HIV Risk Behavior’; Weait, ‘Criminal Law and the Sexual Transmission of HIV’; Weait, ‘On Being Responsible’; Elliott, Criminal Law and HIV/AIDS.
Wolf and Vezina, ‘Crime and Punishment’, 870.
See, e.g., Lazzarini al., ‘Evaluating the Impact of Criminal Laws on HIV Risk Behavior’; cf. Holland, ‘HIV/AIDS and the Criminal Law’.
R. v. Cuerrier, para. 143.
See, e.g., J.G. Hodge and L.O. Gostin ‘Handling Cases of Willful Exposure through HIV Partner Counseling and Referral Services’, Women's Rights Law Reporter 23, no. 1 (2001): 45 (describing New York's and California's partner notification laws and pointing out the tension resulting from the need to respect an HIV-positive individual's privacy so that she or he will participate in public health efforts and the need to warn those who are at risk of being HIV-positive after being exposed to the virus, which despite efforts to maintain the anonymity of the individual may nonetheless result in the individual's identity being deduced).
Lazzarini and Klitzman, ‘HIV and the Law’, 537.
National AIDS Trust, ‘Criminal Prosecution of HIV Transmission’.
See, e.g., J. Holland, C. Ramazanoglu, S. Scott, S. Sharpe, and R. Thomson, ‘Risk, Power, and the Possibility of Pleasure: Young Women and Safer Sex’, AIDS Care 4, no. 3 (1993): 273.
G. Marks, S. Burris, and T.A. Peterman, ‘Reducing Sexual Transmission of HIV from Those Who Know They Are Infected: The Need for Personal and Collective Responsibility’, AIDS 13, no. 3 (1999): 297.
M. Ekstrand, R. Stall, S. Kegeles, R. Hays, M. DeMayo, and T. Coates, ‘Safer Sex among Gay Men: What Is the Ultimate Goal?’, AIDS 7, no. 2 (1993): 281, 281.
R. v. D.C. (14 February 2008), Longueuil 505-01-058007-051 (Court of Québec, unreported).
Ibid., paras 130–1.
G. Marks, N. Crepaz, J.W. Senterfitt, and R.S. Janssen, ‘Meta-analysis of High Risk Sexual Behavior in Persons Aware and Unaware They Are Infected with HIV in the United States: Implications for HIV Prevention Programs’, Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 39 (2005): 446: those who do not know they are HIV-positive are more likely to engage in risky sexual practices.
M. Mills, ‘Who's Really the Victim here’, XTRA! West, 31 October 2006, http://www.xtra.ca/public/Vancouver/Whos_really_the_victim_here-2053.aspx (accessed 30 November 2008).
R. v. Cuerrier, para. 144.
R. v. Dica, para. 59.
R. v. Konzani [2005] 2 Cr App R 198, para. 44.
M. Weait and Y. Azad, ‘The Criminalization of HIV Transmission in England and Wales: Questions of Law and Policy’, HIV/AIDS Policy and Law Review 10, no. 2 (2005): 5, 9.
Arkansas Code Annotated, s. 5-14-123; Michigan Compiled Laws Annotated, s. 333.5210.
Wolf and Vezina, ‘Crime and Punishment’, 851.
Missouri Revised Statutes Annotated, s. 191.677; South Carolina Code Annotated, s. 44-29-145; Virginia Code Annotated, s. 18.2-67.4:1.
Missouri Revised Statutes Annotated, s. 191.677.
This may be the case where general criminal laws are used to prosecute exposure or transmission or where statutes explicitly leave risk determination to juries. For example, Tennessee law prohibits people with HIV knowingly engaging in ‘intimate contact’, defined as ‘bodily contact which exposes a person to the body fluid of the infected person in any manner that presents a significant risk of HIV transmission’, Tennessee Code Annotated, s. 39-13-109; South Dakota's and Oklahoma's laws prohibit ‘conduct reasonably likely to result in the transfer of the person's own blood, semen or vaginal secretions into the bloodstream of another person’, Oklahoma Statutes Annotated Title 21, s. 1192.1; South Dakota Codified Laws s. 22-18-32.
K.K. Holmes, R. Levine, and M. Weaver, ‘Effectiveness of Condoms in Preventing Sexually Transmitted Infections’, Bulletin of the World Health Organization 82, no. 6 (2004): 454.
S.D. Pinkerton and P.R. Abramson, ‘Effectiveness of Condoms in Preventing HIV Transmission’, Social Science and Medicine 44, no. 9 (1997): 1303.
T.C. Quinn, M.J. Wawer, N. Sewankambo, D. Serwadda, C. Li, F. Wabwire-Mangen, M.O. Meehan, T. Lutalo, and R.H. Gray, ‘Viral Load and Heterosexual Transmission of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1’, New England Journal of Medicine 342, no. 12 (2000): 921. One recent study of 593 sero-discordant couples in Spain found that 8.3% of the initially HIV-negative partners whose partners were not taking anti-retroviral therapy became infected during the study period, whereas no partner was infected where her or his HIV-positive partner was treated with highly active anti-retroviral therapy (HAART): J. Castilla, J. del Romero, V. Hernando, B. Marincovich, S. Garcia, and C. Rodriguez, ‘Effectiveness of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy in Reducing Heterosexual Transmission of HIV’, Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 40, no. 1 (2005): 96.
See, e.g., A. Wald and K. Link, ‘Risk of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection in Herpes Simplex Virus Type 2-Seropositive Persons: A Meta-analysis’, Journal of Infectious Diseases 185, no. 1 (2002): 45.
R.H. Gray et al., ‘Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Men in Rakai, Uganda: A Randomised Trial’, The Lancet 369, no. 9562 (2007): 657; R.C. Bailey et al., ‘Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Young Men in Kisumu, Kenya: A Randomised Controlled Trial’, The Lancet 369, no. 9562 (2007): 643.
There have been efforts to determine the per-act risk of transmission for various sex acts. UK guidelines put a woman's risk of contracting the virus through receptive vaginal sex with a man at 1 in 500 to 1 in 1000; a man's risk of contracting HIV through penetrative vaginal or anal intercourse at 1 in 1666; a receptive partner's risk of contracting the virus through anal sex at 1 in 500; and a person's risk of contracting HIV by performing oral sex at negligible to 1 in 2500. The likelihood of contracting HIV from receiving oral sex is not considered a significant transmission risk: M. Fisher et al., ‘UK Guideline for the Use of Post-exposure Prophylaxis for HIV Following Sexual Exposure’, International Journal of STD & AIDS 17 (2006): 81.
Thus, the constitutionality of HIV criminalisation laws in the US has been challenged, unsuccessfully, as vague and thus in violation of the fundamental principle of nulum criminem sinem lege (that people ought to be able to know what the law is at the time they are said to violate it). See, e.g., Illinois v. Russell, 630 N.E.2d 794 (Illinois 1994); Iowa v. Keene, 629 N.W.2d 360 (Iowa 2001); Missouri v. Mahan, 971 S.W.2d 307 (Missouri 1998); Guevara v. Superior Court (California): 73 Cal. Rptr. 2d 421 (App. 6th Dist. 1998); Louisiana v. Gamberella, 633 So. 2d 595 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1993); Washington v. Stark, 832 P.2d 109 (Wash. App. 1992). Similar arguments were raised and rejected in R. v. Cuerrier, para. 139, and R. v. Dica, para. 55.
For example, the Supreme Court of Canada stated in R. v. Cuerrier, para. 129, that ‘the careful use of condoms might be found to so reduce the risk of harm that it could no longer be considered significant’. See, similarly, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in R. v. Dica, para. 11.
R. v. Nduwayo [2006] BCJ, no. 3396, original instructions to jury, 12 December 2005 (unreported) (British Columbia Supreme Court).
R. v. Mabior (2008) 78 WCB (2d) 380 (Manitoba Queen's Bench).
Ibid., para. 116
Ibid., para. 72.
Ibid., para. 117.
R. v. J.M. [2005] OJ No. 5649 (Ontario Superior Court of Justice).
Ibid., para. 2.
See Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, Prosecutions for HIV Transmission and Exposure.
See Crown Prosecution Service, ‘Policy for Prosecuting Cases Involving the Intentional or Reckless Sexual Transmission of Infection’, http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/sti.html (accessed 30 November 2008).
HM Advocate v. Mola.
Chalmers, ‘The Criminalization of HIV Transmission’, 161, citing generally A. Ashworth, ‘Belief, Intent, and Criminal Liability’, in Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence: Third Series, ed. J. Eekelaar and J. Bell (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), 16.
Ibid.
S.H. Kadish, ‘The Criminal Law and the Luck of the Draw’, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 84 (1994): 679. Proving actual transmission also raises evidentiary problems: see E.J. Bernard et al., The Use of Phylogenetic Analysis as Evidence in Criminal Investigation of HIV Transmission (London: NAM, 2007).
J. Elford, ‘Changing Patters of Sexual Behaviour in the Era of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy’, Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases 19, no. 1 (2006): 26.
T. Schacker et al., ‘Clinical and Epidemiologic Features of Primary HIV Infection’, Annals of Internal Medicine 125 (1996): 257.
B. Varghese et al., ‘Reducing the Risk of Sexual HIV Transmission: Quantifying the Per-Act Risk for HIV on the Basis of Choice of Partner, Sex Act, and Condom Use’, Sexually Transmitted Diseases 29, no. 1 (2002): 38.
See generally J.M. Mann and D.J.M. Tarantola, ‘Societal Vulnerability: Contextual Analysis’, in AIDS in the World II: Global Dimensions, Social Roots, and Responses, ed. J.M. Mann and D.J.M. Tarantola (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 444. See also UNAIDS, 2008 Report on the Global HIV/AIDS Epidemic (Geneva: Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, 1998).
National AIDS Trust, ‘Criminal Prosecution of HIV Transmission, 12.
R. James, Y. Azad, and M. Weait, ‘Are the People Prosecuted for HIV Transmission in the Criminal Courts Representative of the UK Epidemic?’ (National AIDS Trust, 2007) (on file with author).
See, e.g., Sullivan and Field, ‘AIDS and the Coercive Power of the State’; Wolf and Vezina, ‘Crime and Punishment’.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Summary Report 1998 (Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 1999), 13, http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/NHSDA/98SummHtml/NHSDA98Summ-03.htm#P230_21832 (accessed 18 August 2008).
Around 12.5% of the US population are African-Americans: US Bureau of the Census, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000 (Washington: US Bureau of the Census, 2000), Table DP-1, http://censtats.census.gov/pub/Profiles.shtml (accessed 18 August 2008).
T. Kykelhahn and T.H. Cohen, Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 2004, (Washington: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2006), 2, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/html/fdluc/2004/fdluc04st.htm (accessed 20 December 2008).
T. Hughes, New Court Commitments to State Prison, 2000 (Washington: National Corrections Reporting Program, Bureau of Justice Statistics), www.ojp.usdof.gov/bjs/dtdata.htm (accessed 30 November 2008).
Marks et al., ‘Meta-analysis of High Risk Sexual Behavior’.
Lazzarini et al., ‘Evaluating the Impact of Criminal Laws on HIV Risk Behavior’, 247.
In R. v. Williams [2003] 2 SCR 134, para. 28 (Supreme Court of Canada): Justice Binnie stated obiter that ‘[o]nce an individual becomes aware of a risk that he or she has contracted HIV, and hence that his or her partner's consent has become an issue, but nevertheless persists in unprotected sex that creates a risk of further HIV transmission without disclosure to his or her partner, recklessness is established’. (emphasis original). At least one of the convictions in the UK to date involved a man who had never taken an HIV test but had been diagnosed with other sexually transmitted diseases, had been warned that he was at risk of HIV infection, and failed thereafter to attend an appointment for testing; see C. Dodds et al., Grievous Harm? Use of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 for Sexual Transmission of HIV (London: Sigma Research, 2005), 26, www.sigmaresearch.org.uk/downloads/report05b.pdf (accessed 10 December 2008), discussing the case of Kouassi Adaye, who pleaded guilty to inflicting grievous bodily harm for HIV transmission despite never having actually taken an HIV test.
John B. v. Superior Court, 2006 WL 1805955 (3 July 2006) (California Supreme Court).
Public Health Agency of Canada, ‘Federal Initiative to Address HIV/AIDS in Canada’, http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/aids-sida/populations_e.html (accessed 30 November 2008).
See, e.g., J.G. Murphy, ‘Introduction’, in Punishment and Rehabilitation, ed. J.G. Murphy (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1995), 2.
Holland, ‘HIV/AIDS and the Criminal Law’, 288–9.
See R. Jürgens, HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report (Montreal: Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network & Canadian AIDS Society, 1996).
See Elliott, Criminal Law and HIV/AIDS, 61.
Burris et al., ‘Do Criminal Laws Influence HIV Risk Behavior?’, 505.
Ibid., 510, quoting Wolf and Vezina, ‘Crime and Punishment’, 824: ‘Williams was ultimately alleged to have exposed forty-eight young women in Jamestown, and an additional fifty to seventy-five young women in New York City.’
C.J. de Rosa and G. Marks, ‘Preventive Counseling of HIV Positive Men and Self Disclosure of Serostatus to Sex Partners: New Opportunities for Prevention’, Health Psychology 17 (1998): 227.
Ibid.
See, e.g., Cuerrier, R. v. Cuerrier, para. 147: ‘It is right and proper for public health authorities to be concerned that their struggles against AIDS should not be impaired. Yet the Code does have a role to play. Through deterrence it will protect and serve to encourage honesty, frankness and safer sexual practices.’
Ibid., para. 142.
Ibid., para. 146.
Ibid., para. 147.
R. v. Nduwayo, original instructions to jury,; R. v. Nduwayo, 2006 BCSC 1972, para. 7.
Burris et al., ‘Do Criminal Laws Influence HIV Risk Behavior?’, 501.
See, e.g., Canadian Sentencing Commission, Sentencing Reform: A Canadian Approach: Report of the Sentencing Commission (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services, 1987), 136–7.
R. v. Gladue (1999) 133 CCC (3d) 385, 409; R. v. Proulx (2000) 140 CCC (3d) 449, para. 57; R. v. Wismayer (1997) 115 CCC (3d) 18, paras 36, 38 and 40.
See, e.g., D.M. Kahan, ‘Between Economics and Sociology: The New Path of Deterrence’, Michigan Law Review 95 (1997): 2477.
Only California's law is limited to deliberate exposure: California Health and Safety Code, s. 120291.
H.L. Dalton, ‘Criminal Law’, in AIDS Law Today: A New Guide for the Public, ed. S. Burris et al. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993), 242, 250.
Burris et al., ‘Do Criminal Laws Influence HIV Risk Behavior?’, 510. See also Weait, ‘On Being Responsible’.
Lazzarini et al., ‘Evaluating the Impact of Criminal Laws on HIV Risk Behavior’, 247.
See, e.g., Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 (c. 22) (UK); Public Health (Infectious Disease) Regulations 1988 (UK). For a review of US state legislation, see W. Parmet, ‘AIDS and Quarantine: The Revival of an Archaic Doctrine’, Hofstra Law Review 14 (1985): 53.
S. Burris and L.O. Gostin, ‘The Impact of HIV/AIDS on the Development of Public Health Law’, in Dawning Answers: How the HIV Epidemic Has Helped to Strengthen Public Health, ed. R.O. Valdisseri (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 96.
J.M. Mann, ‘Human Rights and AIDS: The Future of the Pandemic’, in Health and Human Rights: A Reader, J.M. Mann et al. (New York: Routledge, 1999), 216, 217.
Ibid.
Ibid., 223.
Kaiser Daily Health Report, ‘Human Rights Watch Criticizes Countries for Proposing, Applying Coercive HIV Testing: Calls on WHO, UNAIDS to Update Guidelines’, 11 August 2006, http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?hint=4&DR_ID=39092 (accessed 10 December 2008).
G.M. Oppenheimer, R. Bayer, and J. Colgrove, ‘Health and Human Rights: Old Wine in New Bottles?’, Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 30 (2002) 522; S.R. Bagenstos, ‘The Americans with Disabilities Act as Risk Regulation’, Columbia Law Review 101 (2001): 1479; Burris and Gostin, ‘The Impact of HIV/AIDS on the Development of Public Health Law’.
These laws had generally fallen into desuetude since the mid twentieth century when antibiotics rendered quarantine redundant in most contexts; see Parmet, ‘AIDS and Quarantine.
See R. Bayer, Private Acts, Social Consequences: AIDS and the Politics of Public Health (New York: Free Press, 1989), explaining why early calls for quarantine were rejected.
N.L. Ford and M.D. Quam, ‘AIDS Quarantine: The Legal and Practical Implications’, Journal of Legal Medicine 8 (1987): 353.
Sullivan and Field, ‘AIDS and the Coercive Power of the State’, 154–5.
Parmet, ‘AIDS and Quarantine’, 82–90.
Ibid., 86.
W.E. Parmet, ‘Quarantine Redux: Bioterrorism, AIDS and the Curtailment of Individual Liberty in the Name of Public Health’, Health Matrix 12 (2003): 85.
Ibid., 96.
R. Bayer, ‘Public Health Policy and the AIDS Epidemic: An End to HIV Exceptionalism?’, New England Journal of Medicine 324, no. 21 (1991): 1500; K.M. DeCock and A.M. Johnson, ‘From Exceptionalism to Normalisation: A Reappraisal of Attitudes and Practice around HIV Testing’, British Medical Journal 316 (1998): 290.
See R. Friedman, ‘The Application of Canadian Public Health Law to AIDS’, Health Law in Canada 9, no. 1 (1988): 49; Burris and Gostin, ‘The Impact of HIV/AIDS on the Development of Public Health Law’; Parmet, ‘AIDS and Quarantine’, 59. L.O. Gostin, S. Burris, and Z. Lazzarini, ‘The Law and the Public's Health: A Study of Infectious Disease Law in the United States’, Columbia Law Review 59 (1999): 101.
R. Bayer and A. Fairchild-Carrino, ‘AIDS and the Limits of Control: Public Health Orders, Quarantine, and Recalcitrant Behavior’, American Journal of Public Health 83, no. 10 (1993): 1472.
Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 (c.22), ss. 35–7; Public Health (Infectious Diseases) Regulations 1985 (UK) SI 1985/434 ss. 36–7; Public Health (Infectious Diseases) Regulations 1988 (UK) SI 1988/546.
Public Health etc. (Scotland) Act 2008 (asp. 5).
R.M. Martin, ‘The Exercise of Public Health Powers in Cases of Infectious Disease: Human Rights Implications’, Medical Law Review 14, no. 1 (2006): 132, 139.
For the United States, see, e.g., Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated, s. 25-4-1406; Delaware Code, ss. 16-703 and 704; Florida Annotated Statutes, s. 384.27; Illinois Compiled Statutes,, 410 I.L.C.S. 325, s. 6; Maine Revised Statues, ss. 22-250-807 and 812; Michigan Compiled Laws, s. 333-5205; Montana Code Annotated, s. 50-18-107; Texas Statutes, ss. 81.082 and 81.174; Utah Code, s. 26-6-4; Vermont Statutes, s. 1096; Code of Virginia, ss. 32.1-43 and 32.1-48.02; Wyoming Statutes, s. 35-4-133; For Canada, see, e.g., Public Health Act, RSA 2000, c. P-37, ss. 40 and 43 (Alberta); Public Health Act, 1994, SS 1994, c. P-37.1, s. 38 (Saskatchewan); Public Health Act, CCSM c. P210, s. 19 (Manitoba); Health Promotion and Protection Act, RSO 1990, c. H-7, ss. 22 and 35 (Ontario); Public Health Act, RSQ, ch. S-22, ss. 88 and 106 (Québec); Public Health Act, SNB 1998, c. P-22.4, ss. 33(4) and 36(2) (New Brunswick); Health Protection Act, SNS 2004, c.4, s. 32(3) (Nova Scotia); Communicable Disease Act, RSNL 1990, c. C-26, s. 15 (Newfoundland).
For the United States, see, e.g., Code of Alabama, ss. 22-11a-3 and 22-11-21; General Statutes of Connecticut, ss. 19a-131c; Delaware Codes, s. 16-1704; Florida Annotated Statutes, s. 384.28; Hawaii Revised Statutes, ss. 325-8 and 325-9; Illinois Compiled Statutes, 410 ILCS 325, s. 6; Iowa Code, s. 139A.9; Mississippi Annotated Code, s. 41-23-2; Montana Code Annotated, s. 50-18-107; South Carolina Code Annotated, s. 44-4-530; Texas Statutes, s. 81.082; Utah Code, s. 26-6-4. For Canada, see, e.g., Public Health Act, RSA 2000, c. P-37, ss. 40 and 45 (Alberta); Public Health Act, 1994, SS 1994, c. P-37.1, s. 38 (Saskatchewan); Public Health Act, CCSM c. P210, s. 19 (Manitoba); Health Promotion and Protection Act, RSO 1990, c. H-7, s. 35 (Ontario); Public Health Act, R.S.Q., ch. S-22, s. 106 (Québec); Health Protection Act, SNS 2004, c.4, s. 32(3) (Nova Scotia); Public Health and Safety Act, RSY 2002, c. 176, s. 2 (Yukon); Communicable Disease Regulation, RRNWT 1990, c. P-13, s. 14(1) (Northwest Territories).
For the United States, see, e.g., Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated, s. 24-4-1406; Delaware Code, s. 16-1704; North Dakota Century Code Annotated, s. 23-07.4-01. For Canada, see, e.g., Public Health Act, 1994, SS 1994, c. P-37.1, s. 38 (Saskatchewan); Public Health Act, CCSM c. P210, s. 19 (Manitoba); Health Promotion and Protection Act, RSO 1990, c. H-7, ss. 22 and 35 (Ontario); Public Health Act, RSQ, ch. S-22, s. 106 (Québec); Public Health Act, SNB 1998, c. P-22.4, s. 33(4) (New Brunswick); Health Protection Act, SNS 2004, c.4, ss. 32(3) and 38(1) (Nova Scotia); Public Health Act, RSPEI 1988, c. P-30, s. 5(4) (Prince Edward Island).
For the United States, see, e.g., Arkansas Annotated Code, s. 20-15-1704; California Health and Safety Code, s. 120280; General Statutes of Connecticut, ss. 19a-131c, Delaware Code, s. 16-1705; Maine Revised Statutes, s. 22-250-810; Michigan Compiled Laws, s. 333-5205; New York Annotated Code, s. 2120; North Dakota Century Code Annotated, s. 23-07.4-02; Texas Statutes, ss. 81.161–7; Code of Virginia, s. 32.1-48.011; West Virginia Code, ss. 16-4-12 and 16-4-14; Wisconsin Statutes, s. 252.11. For Canada, see, e.g., Public Health Act, 1994, SS 1994, c. P-37.1, s. 45.1(1) (Saskatchewan); Public Health Act, CCSM c. P210, s. 22.7 (Manitoba); Health Promotion and Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H-7, s. 35 (Ontario); Public Health Act, SNB 1998, c. P-22.4, ss. 36(1) and (2) (New Brunswick); Health Protection Act, SNS 2004, c. 4, ss. 38(1) and 46 (Nova Scotia); Public Health Act, R.S.P.E.I. 1988, c. P-30, s. 5(4) (Prince Edward Island).
For the United States, see, e.g., Florida Code, s. 384.34; Iowa Code, s. 139A.25; Mississippi Annotated Code, s. 41-23-2; Nebraska Code, s. 71-506; South Carolina Code Annotated, s. 44-4-530; Code of Virginia, s. 32.1-48.014; West Virginia Code, s. 16-4-27; Wisconsin Statutes, s. 252.25. For Canada, see, e.g., Public Health Act, 1994, SS 1994, c. P-37.1, s. 60 (Saskatchewan); Public Health Act, SNB 1998, c. P-22.4, s. 52(3) (New Brunswick); Public Health Act, RSPEI 1988, c. P-30, s. 5(4) (Prince Edward Island); Communicable Disease Act, RSNL 1990, c. C-26, s. 15 (Newfoundland); Public Health and Safety Act, RSY 2002, c. 176, s. 22 (Yukon).
The principle of least restrictive means is an ethical principle in public health: see, e.g., American Public Health Association, Public Code of Ethics, http://www.apha.org/codeofethics/ethics.htm (accessed 30 November 2008), as well as a legal principle requiring the use of less coercive means, such as education and, arguably, social resources necessary for compliance such as safe housing, before the state may resort to more coercive approaches such as detention: L.O. Gostin, ‘The Resurgent Tuberculosis Epidemic in the Era of AIDS: Reflections on Public Health, Law and Society’, Maryland Law Review 54 (1995): 110. On whether public health detention legislation meets the least restrictive means principle, see Bayer and Fairchild-Carrino, ‘AIDS and the Limits of Control’; R. Martin, ‘Law as a Tool in Promoting and Protecting Public Health: Always in Our Best Interests?’, Public Health 121 (2007): 846. For a judicial treatment of the principle in the context of detention orders for non-compliance with behavioural orders to prevent HIV transmission, see Enhorn v. Sweden [2005] 41 EHRR 30 (European Court of Human Rights).
Bayer and Fairchild-Carrino, ‘AIDS and the Limits of Control’, 1475.
Ibid., 1473.
Ibid., 1474.
Ibid. See also D.E. Woodhouse et al., ‘Restricting Personal Behavior: Case Studies on Legal Measures to Prevent the Spread of HIV’, International Journal of STDs and AIDS 4, no. 2 (1993): 114.
RSA 2000 c. P-37, ss. 29 and 39ff.
The model is described in R. Bessner, ‘Persons Who Fail to Disclose Their HIV/AIDS Status: Conclusions Reached by an Expert Working Group’, Canada Communicable Disease Report 31, no. 5 (2005): 53.
Gordon Kliewer (former HIV designated nurse for the Calgary Health Region) in discussion with author, 13 April 2008.
See R. v. Booth (2005) 71 WCB (2d) 363 (Alberta Provincial Court).
Bayer and Fairchild-Carrino, ‘AIDS and the Limits of Control’, 1475.
W.N. Renke, ‘Criminal Justice and Public Health’, in Public Health Law & Policy in Canada, ed. T.M. Bailey, T. Caulfield, and N.M. Reis (Toronto: Butterworths, 2005), 429.
For a description of the current state of discussion of new governance approaches, see O. Lobel, ‘The Renew Deal: The Rise and Fall of Regulation and the Rise of Governance in Contemporary Legal Thought’, Minnesota Law Review 89 (2004): 342.
See, e.g., M.C. Dorf and C.F. Sabel, ‘Drug Treatment Courts and Emergent Experimentalist Government’, Vanderbilt Law Review 53 (2000): 829.
J.L. Cohen, Regulating Intimacy: A New Legal Paradigm (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002).
See, e.g., R. v. Cuerrier, para. 142.
R. Weisberg, ‘Norms and Criminal Law, and the Norms of Criminal Law Scholarship’, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 93, nos 2-3 (2003): 467.
Cf. Weait, ‘On Being Responsible’, noting that the criminal law, rooted as it is in classic Western liberal traditions, posits a decontextualised subject when it measures all actors' behaviours against an idealised reasonable person.
See, e.g., J. Braithwaite and P. Pettit, Not Just Deserts: A Republican Theory of Criminal Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990); A.W. Dzur and R. Mirchandani, ‘Punishment and Democracy: The Role of Public Deliberation’, Punishment and Society 9, no. 2 (2007): 151.
R.A. Duff, Punishment, Communication, and Community. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 200.
This paper, for example, does not discuss in detail many of the due process safeguards that appear to be absent in much public health legislation.
J. Phoenix, ‘Governing Prostitution: New Formations, Old Agendas’, Canadian Journal of Law and Society 22, no. 2 (2007): 73.