§2. Illegal withdrawal and use of human bodies as the basic problem of international legal regulation in the field of transplantology

Transplantation of human bodies allows to rescue a life of many people and to restore the basic functions when no comparable alternatives by efficiency exist. For 50 years transplantation became one of successful kinds of practice in our world.

The general concept of transplantation is presented in the Global glossary on a donor service and transplantation the CART according to which «transplantation is a change (prizhivlenie) cages, fabrics or human bodies from the donor to the recipient for the purpose of function (functions) restoration in an organism» [88]. In 2016 by data the CART, that is 135 860 bodies have been replaced to 7,25 % more than year before [89].

Every year in the world demand for donor bodies raises. According to the American Fund of Change (American Transplant Foundation), 123 000 persons in the United States of America are in turn to receive

Body. Each 12 minutes the new name is added in the list, and on the average 21 persons in day dies, not having waited the turn because of shortage of bodies [90].

Also in the newsletter of Council of Europe Transplant for 2018 it has been noticed, that by the end of 2017 more than 144 082 patients have been registered in expectation lists on change of a kidney, a liver, heart, lungs, a pancreas or an intestines. The quantity of the patients, expecting change, has increased by 1,2 % in comparison with 2016. Every day 19 patients in a waiting list died that there are no accessible bodies [91].

At the same time international legal regulation of transplantology is not necessary on a place. The wide circulation and problematics scope have certificates of the international intergovernmental organisations.

So, the CART resolutions in sphere of transplantation of human bodies (in particular, Resolutions WHA40.13, WHA42.5, WHA44.25, WHA57.18) [92] repeatedly were accepted.

In 1991 the World assembly of public health services had been approved Resolution WHA44.25 which has fixed Supervising principles on transplantation of human bodies. These principles have laid down in fundamentals of legislation of the foreign states in the field of transplantation.

On May, 21st, 2010 the World assembly of public health services has accepted resolution WHA63.22 on which basis she has approved the updated variant of Supervising principles the CART on transplantation of human cages, fabrics and bodies [93] (further - Supervising principles the CART) in which the sphere of activity for the purpose of optimisation of methods of transplantation and a donor service has been defined.

The order of transplantation of human bodies is regulated by diplomas of the World Medical Association (further - VMA). In October, 1985 at XXXVII session VMA the Statement for trade in live bodies in which «purchase and sale of human bodies for transplantation» [94] has been condemned was accepted.

At XXXIX session VMA in 1987 the Declaration on transplantation of human bodies [95] has been accepted. In it 8 principles which are recommended all doctors, human bodies engaged in change are resulted. The given Declaration contains position that «any doctor cannot incur responsibility for operation carrying out on body change until observance of the rights and the donor, and the recipient» [96] will be provided.

At 46th session VMA in September, 1994 the Resolution concerning behaviour of doctors has been accepted at realisation of transplantation of human bodies in which serious concern in increasing quantity of messages on participation of doctors in operations on transplantation of the human bodies withdrawn from bodies «the prisoners sentenced to a death penalty has been expressed, not having possibility to refuse it or without their preliminary consent; persons suffering mental and physical defects, whose death is considered as simplification of their sufferings and as the basis for a fence of their bodies; poor people who have agreed to leave the bodies for commercial reasons; children stolen with that end in view» [97].

In October, 2012 at 63rd session of General Assembly VMA the Statement for the donation of bodies and fabrics [98] was accepted. According to the given statement change of human bodies which have been received illegally is not supposed, and also purchase and sale of bodies for profit reception is condemned.

The international certificates resulted above have recommendatory character, however they are capable to influence acceptance of the national legislation in considered area.

At regional level the majority mezhdunarodnopravovyh the certificates regulating questions of transplantation of human bodies is accepted. Major of them, have been accepted within the limits of the Council of Europe.

As the basic regional certificate it is necessary to allocate the Convention of Oviedo. Main principles of the given Convention in transplantology sphere concern protection of the rights and advantage of donors and recipients. For live donors consent procedure, and also protection of persons not capable to give such consent is obligatory. For recipients - fair access to transplantation in the form of the official waiting lists, accurately registered medical indications, minimisation of risk of transfer of diseases. At extraction of bodies at the died donors the fact of certification of death, the consent stated by them at a life, respect for a body of the person is obligatory.

The principles fixed in Convention Ovedo, find development in the Additional report to the given Convention. In particular, positions of the given report concern withdrawals of bodies at the live and deceased persons. So in item 13 position that «the body or a fabric can be removed at the live donor only is fixed after the corresponding person will give the free, informed and certain consent to it in writing or to official body». In item 17 it is defined, that «bodies and fabrics do not leave at the deceased person if the consent required according to the legislation or the permission to such removal is not received» ".

In spite of the fact that now the Convention of Oviedo and the Additional report to it are not signed and not ratified Russian [99]

Federation, positions of the given international legal certificates can be considered and used at formation of the interstate legislation in transplantation sphere.

It is necessary to notice, that the Convention 2015 [100] also is the basic international legal tool in counteraction to various types of the crimes connected with illegal transplantation of human bodies.

Within the limits of EU right the Instruction of the European Parliament and Council 2010/53/EU from 07.07.2010 [101], establishing the quality standards and safety of use of the human bodies intended for transplantation has been accepted. In development of the given instruction by the European Commission the Instruction 2012/25 / EU from 09.10.2012 [102] which establishes information procedures of an exchange between member states the human bodies intended for transplantation within EU has been accepted.

For the purpose of maintenance of optimum use of accessible donor bodies the various noncommercial organisations are created. For example, a key role in distribution of donor bodies for transplantation plays "evrotransplant" in such countries, as: Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, Hungary, Germany, the Netherlands, Croatia, Slovenia. The exchange organisation donor bodies of such countries as Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Estonia is engaged "Skandijatransplant".

Thanks to the international exchange of donor bodies between member states the given organisations, suitable donor bodies can be found for many patients from other countries-participants of the organisations that allows to reduce "waiting list" essentially.

Such European countries as Belarus, Spain, Italy, the Great Britain, Portugal, Switzerland, France, etc. are included into international community Foedus. Association Foedus, unlike "evrotransplant" and "Skandijatransplant", is not rigidly organised system. That is the country which has entered this organisation, do not expose severe constraints on change of the legislation and the requirement on distribution of bodies. All is carried out on a mutually advantageous and voluntary basis. If the patient needs to execute urgently operation on kidney transplantation, but at present the given body in the country is not present, in such situation the inquiry in the given organisation is carried out. As a result it is possible to receive donor body from any member country of the organisation.

Now one of serious threats becomes «transplantatsionnyj tourism» - when «rich patients» leave one states for change of bodies in the states where commercial transplantation is not forbidden, and the rights of the donor are not protected in any way.

In the Istanbul Declaration it is defined, that «the trip for transplantation performance becomes transplantatsionnym tourism if it is thus found out transplantatsionnyj kommertsializm, trade in bodies or, if components and participants (bodies, doctors, transplantatsionnye the centres), participating in maintenance of operations to the patient from abroad, undermine thereby ability of the country to maintenance transplantatsionnoj the help of own population» [103].

Deficiency of donor bodies exists in all countries, therefore occurrence of the big number of foreign patients leads to reduction of operations on transplantation for local population. In this connection in civilised countries the foreigners requiring change of bodies, in particular such bodies, as heart, especially - children's are not paid compliments.

Also position about an interdiction transplantatsionnogo tourism contains in the comment to a principle of 5 Supervising principles the CART: «the interdiction for payment of granting of cages, fabrics and bodies should concern all individuals, including recipients who try to bypass internal laws by departure in territory where interdictions for donor service use in commercial objectives are not applied» [104].

transplantatsionnyj tourism is the difficult phenomenon and mentions a wide spectrum, both legal, and ethical questions. The medical centres of some countries through a network the Internet invite patients to arrive to them from - for borders for carrying out of operations on change of bodies for transplantation for a certain payment. In practice transplantatsionnyj tourism is difficult for distinguishing from trips for transplantation performance. Unfortunately, the given phenomena are still insufficiently studied.

Also now there are no uniform approaches to definition of death of the person which gives the chance withdrawals of human bodies. The greatest distribution to medicine the criterion has received «death of a brain». The death of a brain is «total nekroz a brain at preservation of activity of heart and the gas exchange provided by means of continuous artificial ventilation of lungs» [105].

In the majority of the European states the criterion of death of a brain is legislatively fixed. In all states of the USA except for New Jersey and New York death of the person the irreversible death of a brain [106] is considered.

In the Russian Federation the criterion of death of the brain, fixed by the Order of Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation from 25.12.2014 № 908н «About the Order of an establishment of the diagnosis of death of a brain of the person» which has become effective on January, 1st, 2016 According to the Order also is applied, «the death of a brain of the person comes at the full and irreversible termination of all functions of the brain, registered at working heart and artificial ventilation of lungs. The moment of death of a brain of the person is the moment of death of the person» [107]. In the given Order possibility of ascertaining of the diagnosis of death of a brain at children at the age from 1 year is provided and is more senior.

Thus, legislative fastening of objective criteria of death of the person will allow to reveal precisely a side between a life and death. Having designated such border, it will be possible to see legitimacy of withdrawal of human bodies, both to death, and after, that will invariably promote counteraction of crimes in sphere of illegal circulation of human bodies.

The problem of realisation of the right of the patient on the informed voluntary consent concerning medical intervention occupies one of the central places in the national legislation regulating transplantation of human bodies.

According to Supervising principles the CART, for carrying out of transplantation bodies can be withdrawn from bodies died, if: «the consent in the form demanded by the law is received; there are no bases to believe, that the deceased person objected to such withdrawal» [108] (the Supervising principle 1).

The legislator at national level fixes not asked consent which sometimes name «a consent presumption» («opting (or contracting) out»), and the asked consent, that is «a disagreement presumption» («opting in»).

In the states where the consent presumption is applied, withdrawal of bodies died for transplantation is carried out in the event that died during lifetime has not expressed the objection against withdrawal of bodies which should be fixed in the diploma or the register.

The consent presumption operates in such countries, as Spain, Austria, Israel, Belgium, Croatia and in other states. For example, in Israel the card "Adi" operates, having signed which, the person certificates the consent to change of bodies after death [109]. In Sweden, Norway, the obligatory consent of members of a family to operation carrying out on transplantation is necessary for Croatia.

According to item 10-1 of the Law of Byelorussia from 04.03.1997 № 28-3 «About transplantation of bodies and fabrics of the person» [110] the right of citizens to disagreement expression to a fence of bodies for transplantation, and also an order of realisation of the granted right is fixed. With a view of control over use of human bodies, and also operative rendering of medical aid to the persons requiring transplantation, in 2012 in the given Law item 10-2 «Uniform register of transplantation» have been entered. Data on persons by which transplantation is spent should be brought In the given register, and also about persons who have declared the disagreement on a fence of bodies for transplantation after death.

At the same time, it is necessary to notice, that Byelorussia since 2011 wins first place among the countries-participants CIS by quantity of the executed operations on transplantation. In 2016 it has been spent 51,7 operations on transplantation on 1 million population [111]. Thus the Russian Federation has low enough indicators: 10 cases on 1 million population. Also it is necessary to notice, that now in the Russian Federation while 50 % - a lifetime donor service, related [112].

In the Russian Federation the presumption of the consent which has found the fastening in the Law of the Russian Federation «About transplantation» 1992 In item 8 of the given Law operates is fixed, that «withdrawal of bodies and (or) fabrics at a corpse is not supposed, if the establishment of public health services at the moment of withdrawal is advised that during lifetime the given person either its close relatives or the legal representative have declared the disagreement on withdrawal of its bodies and (or) fabrics after death for transplantation to the recipient» [113]. At the same time item 5 of the Federal act from 12.01.1996 № 8-FZ «About burial and funeral business» contains position that «crucial importance for transplantation has will of the person about the worthy relation to its body after the death, expressed orally in the presence of witnesses or in writing, including, and about the consent and disagreement to withdrawal of bodies» [114].

The analysis of above-stated articles allows to come to conclusion that positions of the given legal documents differently open the same question - legitimacy of posthumous withdrawal of bodies.

The constitutional Court of the Russian Federation also had been considered the given problem.

Mother Alina Sablinoj, deceased as a result of road and transport incident in Moscow, having learnt from the conclusion of the forensic scientist, that some bodies have withdrawn from the daughter for transplantation, has addressed in court, demanding to collect from hospital indemnification of moral harm. Courts of justice have given up in satisfaction of claims then in 2015 relatives Alina Sablinoj have addressed in the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.

The constitutional Court, referring to own Definition from 04.12.2003 № 459 - About «About refusal in taking cognizance of inquiry of the Saratov provincial court about check of constitutionality of article 8 of the Law of the Russian Federation« About transplantation of bodies and (or) fabrics of the person »has confirmed legality of withdrawal of bodies for transplantation after death of the person without the consent of its relatives. It has been specified, that item 8 of the Law of the Russian Federation« About transplantation »1992« cannot be not clear or uncertain and consequently cannot

To be considered as breaking constitutional laws of citizens »[115].

Also by Court it has been noticed, that if it is known about the negative relation to transplantation died, its close relatives or legal representatives this procedure to spend it is forbidden. The Court of justice established, that the being of requirements of applicants «is actually reduced to necessity of transition from a presumption of the consent existing in Russia on withdrawal of bodies of the person after his death to system of the asked consent» [116]. By court also it is noticed, that the system of a presumption of the consent selected the Russian legislator is based on the conventional principles and norms of international law to what Supervising principles the CART testify, and also the Additional report to the Convention of Oviedo.

In a substantiation of the arguments on Alina Sablinoj's business applicants referred also to a position of the European Court under human rights (further - the European Court), expressed by it in decisions from 24.06.2014 business «Petrov (Petrova) against the Latvian Republic» (the complaint № 4605/05) [117] and from 13.01.2015 business «Elberte against the Latvian Republic» (the complaint № 61243/08) [118], specifying, that these affairs are similar under actual facts and the European Court has come to conclusion, that in a situation of applicants (connected with withdrawal without their notice and the consent for transplantation of bodies of the lost members of a family) infringement of an interdiction of the reference severe and degrading advantage, and also the rights on private and home life (item 3 and 8 Conventions on protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms from 04.11.1950 - further EKPCH) [119] took place.

In the first business «Petrov (Petrova) against the Latvian Republic» (the complaint № 4605/05) [120] son of the declarant has got heavy traumas as a result dorozhnotransportnogo incidents then has been taken to hospital where to it have made cranial trepanation. Further physicians the decision on withdrawal of a kidney and a spleen for the subsequent transplantation of bodies was accepted.

The declarant has not been notified on deterioration of a condition of the son, to it also did not address for the consent to transplantation of bodies. That has occurred, the declarant has learnt in 9 months during consideration of criminal case upon road and transport incident. After giving of the complaint by the declarant of the power have concluded, that removal of bodies of her son corresponded to the national legislation, and have refused to initiate criminal case.

According to the Law of the Latvian Republic «About protection of a body of the deceased person and use of human bodies and fabrics in medicine» from 01.11.1995 [121], operating as of 01.01.2002, it was provided, that any person had the right to notify during lifetime in writing establishment specially created for these purposes that he agrees the subsequent withdrawal of the bodies after death. Such information is brought in the internal passport of the concrete person about its consent or disagreement to withdrawal of bodies during transplantation, and also the given information is brought in specially existing registers. Article 11 of the given Law provided, that withdrawal of bodies died is supposed only in those in cases when the deceased donor did not object during lifetime to transplantation, and close relatives did not object on use of its bodies after his death.

In the Decision from 24.06.2014 on business «(Petrova) against the Latvian Republic» (the complaint № 4605/05) the European Court has confirmed Petrov, that object of article 8 EKPCH is basically protection of the person against any intervention in realisation of its rights from public authorities. The European court recognised, that applicable positions of the Latvian legislation have not been formulated accurately enough and did not provide a high-grade legal protection from an arbitrariness. The declarant, formally having the right to object to withdrawal of bodies of her son, has not been informed on how and when it can realise the rights, receiving appropriate explanations, how and when these rights to carry out. Thus, in the given case the Court has come to conclusion about breach of law of the declarant on respect of its private life, guaranteed by item 8 EKPCH.

On the second business «Elberte against the Latvian Republic» (the complaint № 61243/08) [122] husband of the declarant was lost in a road accident. During opening in the centre of forensic pathology at it fabrics have been withdrawn and transferred in pharmaceutical company G ermanii for manufacturing bioimplantov. About withdrawal of fabrics the declarant has learnt in two years during consideration of criminal case upon scale illegal withdrawal from corpses of bodies and fabrics.

The declarant approved, that on business infringement of article 8 EKPCH has been admitted, in particular, that withdrawal of fabrics of her husband has been spent without its and its consent. Also, referring to article 3 EKPCH, the declarant complained that the body of her husband has been returned with the connected feet.

In the given case norms of the Law «About protection of a body of the deceased person and use of human bodies and fabrics in medicine» from 01.11.1995 operating as of 01.01.2002, as in business «Petrov against the Latvian Republic» also operated.

The European Court recognised, that on business infringement of item 8 EKPCH as the authorities of Latvia have not created the legal and practical conditions which have allowed the declarant to express the opinion concerning withdrawal of fabrics of its died husband has been admitted, and have admitted thereby intervention in realisation of the right by it on respect of private life. Also the European Court had been recognised an assumption of infringement of item 3 EKPCH as the sufferings caused to the declarant, were the reference degrading advantage.

Further changes have been made to the Law of the Latvian Republic from 01.11.1995 «About protection of a body of the deceased person and use of human bodies and fabrics in medicine» in reply to a situation of the given cases. These changes have been directed on more accurate definition of the term "consent", including the consent from close relatives.

According to the brought changes in the Latvian legislation, withdrawal of bodies it is supposed only when in the state register there is no written refusal of the deceased person of posthumous withdrawal of bodies or its consent to this use and if its close relatives do not give the notice in writing to medical institution prior to the beginning of procedure about its refusal of the transplantation, expressed by it during lifetime. Withdrawal of bodies at the dead child for transplantation is supposed only in the event that there is a written approval to this procedure from one of parents or legal representatives.

In the beginning of 2016 Alina Sablinoj's business has arrived in the European Court.

In 2015 Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation develops and brings in the Government of the Russian Federation the draught federal law «About a donor service of bodies, parts of bodies of the person and their transplantation» [123]. In it is provided to create the federal register of donors of bodies, recipients and donor bodies of the person. Thanks to the given law «in the country there will be a uniform base of donors and requiring a donor service», [124] - has commented on the document main transplantolog the Russian Federation Sergey Gaultier. Such register is necessary for bolshej for a transparency of process of transplantology.

In the USA, Germany, the Great Britain, Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Canada, Romania, Australia, Ukraine and other countries the presumption of disagreement which means operates, that died the consent to withdrawal of bodies during lifetime has been declared. If the died has not left the statement for the consent to posthumous withdrawal of human bodies the member of a family can give such permission. The disagreement presumption assumes certain documentary acknowledgement of the consent. In the USA the mark about the consent to a donor service of bodies is put in the document, confirming the person. This information is accessible to all, nobody does of it secrets for associates. For example, in Canada the person is obliged to express the will concerning the consent or disagreement to posthumous withdrawal at it bodies or fabrics at reception of the driver's licence or a medical card [125]. In Portugal, Poland and other countries registers of the persons are led, doing not wish to be donors.

Each country, applying donor models, reaches various results on donor service indicators. But as a whole the available statistics shows, that fastening in the interstate legislation of a presumption of the consent allows to increase quantity of donors essentially.

It is necessary to notice, that Germany which is one of the leading countries in the field of medicine and where the disagreement presumption is applied, strongly lags behind on indicators of a posthumous donor service. So, in 2017 there were 9,3 donors on 1 million population. In the Netherlands this indicator constitutes - 14,3. And in the countries where the consent presumption is applied, indicators considerably above. In

Austria-23,5, in Belgium - 30,6, in Croatia - 31,8 [126].

In 2017 Spain with 2183 donors and 5259 replaced bodies again, 26 - j year successively, has confirmed the world leadership - 46,9 donors on one million population [127]. It is necessary to notice, that Spain is the country where potential possibilities of transplantation of bodies of the person are effectively used. In the given country the National organisation on transplantation Organizacion Nacional de Trasplantes (ONT) which main objective - to promote the gratuitous donation of bodies that the citizen of Spain requiring change, had every chance on operation on transplantation actively operates. Successful development of transplantology in Spain became possible thanks to three factors: in the country operate the uniform legislation regulating this very uneasy sphere of medicine, the centralised system of reception of human bodies is developed, active information-educational work with the population about necessity of a donor service is led.

On December, 1st, 2015 in the Wales (Great Britain) has been entered a presumption of the consent concerning a donor service of bodies. Earlier in the given region of the Great Britain the disagreement presumption operated. The Minister of Health of the Wales Mark Drejkford has characterised system as «an innovative step which will help to rescue lives of people» [128]. In other territories of the Great Britain the system a presumption of disagreement concerning a donor service of bodies still operates.

Also since January, 1st, 2017 in France the novel, concerning a posthumous donor service of bodies has become effective. The novel means, that each Frenchman after the death automatically becomes the donor of bodies. The exception will be constituted only by the citizens registered in National


The register of refusals [129].

Summing up to the aforesaid, it is necessary to notice, that all over the world there is a problem of shortage of donor bodies in this connection, many people requiring transplantation, are doomed to death. The growing demand for donor bodies and limitation of the offer is a principal cause of many human bodies of legal and ethical problems arising round transplantation. The cores from them are questions of definition of the moment of death of the person, and also the consent to a posthumous donor service. Key aspect is the question kommertsializatsii donor bodies. According to the prevailing point of view, human bodies for transplantation should be given on a gratuitous basis as kommertsializatsija donor bodies serves interests rich at the expense of the poor.

Now the unique country where legislatively it is not forbidden kommertsializatsija by human bodies, Iran is. In this country any interested person for financial compensation can become the donor and receive from the state material aid from special state fund of support. In this connection in Iran almost there are no turns on transplantation of many bodies [130].

In all other countries the gratuitous form of participation in a donor service of bodies operates. At the same time it is necessary to notice, that already now some transplantologi, support legal sale of bodies. So, Sir Peter Bell, the professor of surgery at University Lejchestera, has offered «payment of indemnifications» to relatives, which have offered a kidney of a member of a family to put a barrier to growing trade in bodies from developing countries »[131].

Emi Fridman, the professor of surgery of medical faculty of Jelsky University, approves, that «at the moment kidneys secretly replace in the countries of the third world from poor donors to rich recipients» [132]. According to Emi Fridmana «the conclusion of this activity from a shade by introduction of the state supervision and financing will provide equality for poor which will get equal access to such bodies. It makes sense, that live donors, poor or rich, received the share of material benefits for the anxiety on other people. Not to make it, actually having limited needy, it is unreasonable and unfair» [133].

Ahad J. Gods, representing the Iranian model of a donor service, notices, that «any restrictions, applicable to a live donor service, aggravate a problem of shortage of bodies even more. Our strategy alternative to a gratuitous donor service, assumes introduction of financial compensation or social privileges for donors of bodies or the settled system of sale of bodies. In the Iranian model occurrence of the ethical questions connected with the paid donor service, has been warned» [134].

Certainly, given approach is inconsistent from the point of view of ethics. But already now in the countries where sale of bodies is forbidden, donors, nevertheless, receive limited indemnification which is not considered payment. For example, Israel and Singapore give a priority at change of bodies to the persons included in the national register of donors [135].

Thus, the analysis of regulation of transplantation of human bodies carried out by us at the international level, shows, that in this sphere there are legal and ethical problems.

So, in the legislation of some the states there are the unresolved problems connected with realisation of the right to reception of the consent to posthumous withdrawal of bodies. We believe, that within the limits of the national law regulation of procedure of reception of the consent to posthumous withdrawal of bodies is necessary.

With a view of the prevention «transplantatsionnogo tourism», causing growth of the crimes connected with illegal circulation of human bodies, it is necessary to unify the interstate norms, concerning duties of the state-participants to provide at national legislative level of restriction on carrying out of changes of bodies to foreign subjects, and also a special procedure for test of distribution of donor bodies.

With a view of availability of human bodies to all levels of population it is necessary for all states to provide an original transparency at distribution of bodies at transplantation and carrying out of operations on change.

In our opinion, it is necessary for Russian Federation to result the interstate legislation in the field of transplantation according to the international norms and to consider the positive experience developed by foreign justice. At the same time, the national law of the Russian Federation tries to resolve now a problem in the given sphere, having developed the draught federal law «About a donor service of bodies, parts of bodies of the person and their transplantation» which will be closer to world practice in the given sphere.

<< | >>
A source: Kozlova Anastas Alekseevna. INTERNATIONAL LEGAL BASES of COOPERATION of the STATES In SPHERE of COUNTERACTION to ILLEGAL CIRCULATION of HUMAN BODIES. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Moscow -. 2018

More on topic §2. Illegal withdrawal and use of human bodies as the basic problem of international legal regulation in the field of transplantology:

  1. 1.1. Formation of transplantology and a problem of illegal withdrawal and a turn of bodies of a human body
  2. Chapter 3. Realisation of international legal standards in the field of transplantology in the legislation of the Russian Federation and a problem of suppression of an illegal turn of bodies of a human body
  3. 2.1.3. International agreements in the field of counteraction of the states to illegal withdrawal and trade in bodies and fabrics of a human body
  4. 2.1. The international conventional regulation of transplantation for the purpose of bar of claim by lapse of time of illegal withdrawal and a turn of bodies of a human body
  5. GALEYEV Gulchachak Ramilovna. INTERNATIONAL LEGAL COOPERATION In SPHERE of the PREVENTION And SUPPRESSION of ILLEGAL WITHDRAWAL, the TURN And TRANSPLANTATION of BODIES of the HUMAN BODY. The DISSERTATION on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Kazan, -2017 2017
  6. §1. The basic directions of the international cooperation under the prevention of crimes in sphere of illegal circulation of human bodies
  7. §3. International legal bases of cooperation of the states on protection of victims of illegal circulation of human bodies
  8. §4. Implementatsija international legal norms on counteraction to illegal circulation of human bodies in the interstate legislation
  9. §1. Qualification of acts as illegal circulation of human bodies on international and to the national law: rather-legal analysis
  10. §3. International legal problems of differentiation of acts "human trafic" and «illegal circulation of human bodies»
  11. Chapter 2. International legal mechanisms of counteraction to illegal circulation of human bodies and problems implementatsii international legal norms in the national legislation