Available in Russian
Authors: Alina Limonova, Konstantin Sharlovskiy
DOI: 10.21128/1812-7126-2025-1-184-205
Keywords: medicine supply; right to medical care; protection of the rights of orphan patients; scope of the right to medicine supply; Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation
Disputes related to the protection of the constitutional right of citizens to medicine supply at the expense of the budget are often the subject of consideration of the courts. However, only in 2024 the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation for the first time attempted to assess the sufficiency of its provision. In the analysed Judgment, the Constitutional Court concludes that the current normative regulation is insufficient to ensure the rights of citizens to access to medicines and, therefore, contradicts the Constitution of the Russian Federation. However, the very statement of the problem and the justification of the solution proposed by the Constitutional Court are not uncontroversial. The article attempts to critically analyse the Court’s position set out in the Judgment in order to predict the possible risks of implementation in legislation and application of the mechanism proposed by the Court. In particular, using the method of legal modelling, the authors identify the risks associated with the filling of the reserve mechanism, as well as untimely and uneven distribution of funds allocated from the budget. The existence of these risks is due to both the abstractness of the Court’s description of the characteristics of the reserve mechanism and insufficient evidence in favour of the fact that the reserve mechanism is in principle capable of being a solution to the problems identified in the Judgment. The article also provides a brief description of the situations related to the problems identified in the Judgment (for example, the ineffectiveness of judicial remedies for patients with life-threatening illnesses), but unable to be resolved by the mechanism proposed by the Constitutional Court. The authors conclude that the absence of the scope of the right to medicine supply, enshrined in the legislation, does not allow to fully restore the violated constitutional right. Determining the scope of the right to medicine supply within the framework of legal doctrine is an urgent task of subsequent research.
About the authors: Alina Limonova – Junior Associate of Life Sciences Practice at “Pepeliaev Group”, Moscow, Russia; Konstantin Sharlovskiy – Partner, Head of Life Sciences Practice at “Pepeliaev Group”, Moscow, Russia.
Citation: Sharlovskiy K., Limonova A. (2025) Konstitutsionno-pravovoe platsebo: analiz pozitsii Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF v Postanovlenii ot 26 sentyabrya 2024 goda Nº41-P o prave na lekarstvennoe obespechenie orfannykh patsientov [Constitutional placebo: critical review of the Russian Constitutional Court Judgment of 26 September 2024 in the case no.41-P on the right to orphan medicines]. Sravnitel'noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, vol.34, no.1, pp.184–205. (In Russian).
References
Kaz'min V.I. (2012) Kommentariy k stat'e 81 [Commentary to article 81]. In: Gadzhiev G.A. (ed.) Kommentariy k Federal'nomu konstitutsionnomu zakonu “O Konstitutsionnom Sude Rossiyskoy Federatsii” [Commentary to the federal constitutional law “On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation”], Moscow: Norma, Infra-M, pp.444–449. (In Russian).
Malyutin N.S. (2017) O merakh reagirovaniya Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF na neispolnenie sobstvennykh resheniy [Response actions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to non-compliance with its decisions]. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo, no.1, pp.55–61. (In Russian).
Nekhlebova N. (2021) “Ne dozhdalsya lekarstva i umer”. Preparat “Trikafta” ot mukovistsidoza v Moskve ne poluchaet nikto [“Couldn’t have waited for the medicine and died”. No one in Moscow receives the Trikafta drug for cystic fibrosis]. Pravmir, 10 dekabrya. Available at: https://www.pravmir.ru/ne-dozhdalsya-lekarstva-i-umer-moskva-ne-zakupaet-preparat-ot-mukovisczidoza-kotoryj-mozhet-spasti-zhizni/ (accessed: 14.03.2025). (In Russian).
Sharlovskiy K. (2025) Dilemma lekarstvennogo obespecheniya. Kak Verkhovnyy sud traktuet vozmozhnost' zameny preparatov i kak eto primenyaetsya v praktike goszakupok [The dilemma of medicine supply. How the Supreme Court interprets the possibility of replacing medicines and how it is applied in state procurement practice]. Farmatsevticheskiy vestnik, no.2. Available at: https://pharmvestnik.ru/articles/Dilemma-lekarstvennogo-obespecheniya-Kak-Verhovnyi-sud-traktuet-vozmojnost-zameny-preparatov-i-kak-eto-primenyaetsya-v-praktike-goszakupok.html (accessed: 14.03.2025). (In Russian).
Umnova-Konyukhova I.A., Aleshkova I.A. (2020) Printsip konstitutsionnoy sderzhannosti: soderzhanie i osobennosti realizatsii [The principle of constitutional moderation: the content and implementation peculiarities]. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo, no.9, pp.20–25. (In Russian).
Vorob'ev N.I., Vorob'eva L.V. (2013) Ob otvetstvennosti za neispolnenie sudebnykh resheniy [About responsibility for non-execution of court decisions]. Rossiyskaya yustitsiya, no.11, pp.38–41. (In Russian).