IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pmu/cjurid/v76y2019p13-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Patient’S Health Electronic File Vs. The Right To Private Life

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina Teodora POP

    (Assistant magistrate at the Constitutional Court of Romania, Associate professor at the Faculty of Philosophy, University of Bucharest, ROMANIA.)

Abstract

Recently, the Constitutional Court of Romania admitted an unconstitutionality exception invoked directly by Ombudsman, through it found that the provisions of art. 30 para. (2) and(3) and the expression “the health electronic file system” in the content of art.280 para. (2) of Law no.95/2006 regarding the reform in the field of health are unconstitutional. In arguing this solution, the Court retained the patient’s health electronic file, regulated by the provisions declared unconstitutional, contains all patient’s private medical data, which are protected by art.26 and art.34 of Constitution and by art.8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court retained that the state has the obligation that, in the situation of regulating, through law, of an electronic system for managing the patients’ medical data, that can be accessed at national level, to grant the confidential character of the medical data, through normative acts of the level of law, and that it is not sufficient that the protection of the medical data to be fulfilled through administrative normative acts which are characterized by high instability and inaccessibility [see also Decision no.17 on 21 January 2015, Decision no.51 on 16 February 2016, and Decision no.61 on 17 February 2017]. But the analyzed legal provisions don’t contain, per se, any legal measure which could be qualified as a guarantee of the right to private life, such that the Court found the infringement of art.26 of Constitution. Also, the Court retained that these guarantees cannot be assured by an administrative normative act, in the circumstances that secondary legislation should be limited at organizing the enforcement of the same guarantees. Consequently, the Court found the infringement of art.1 para. (5) of the Constitution, as well. This is not the first time when the Court underlines the importance of protection of patient’s medical data confidentiality through the constitutional and conventional provisions regarding the right to private life. The Court pronounced also other decisions regarding the same issues and underlined the importance of regulating expressly the conditions in which the medical data can be divulgated during the patient’s life and after his death [see Decision no.1429 on 2 November 2010], actually according to the European Court of Human Rights case-law. Thus, the usage of electronic devices and of certain electronic applications, projected to be used at national level, on the purpose of curing patients with celerity, is allowed only if the private life of the patients is respected.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Teodora POP, 2019. "The Patient’S Health Electronic File Vs. The Right To Private Life," Curentul Juridic, The Juridical Current, Le Courant Juridique, Petru Maior University, Faculty of Economics Law and Administrative Sciences and Pro Iure Foundation, vol. 76, pages 13-22, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:76:y:2019:p:13-22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.upm.ro/facultati_departamente/ea/RePEc/curentul_juridic/rcj19/recjurid191_1F.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item

    Keywords

    patient’s health electronic file; the right to private life; national electronic system; unconstitutionality; the effectiveness of the infralegal legislation;

    JEL classification:

    • K4 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:76:y:2019:p:13-22. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bogdan Voaidas). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/feuttro.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.