排雷除荆，探寻输血感染艾滋病病毒赔偿的新路径

 

输血感染艾滋病病毒（以及肝炎病毒，包括乙肝和丙肝）在过去十余年间一直未能得到有效解决。政府尤其是地方政府在这一问题上处理乏术，具体应对时行为简单粗暴并缺少透明度，长久以来在国内外引发各种关注与负面评论。2010年以来，一个由经验丰富的伦理学者、法学者、律师和医学界人士组成的独立专家小组对这一问题进行了长时间的梳理和研究，在综合国内外相关经验教训的基础上，通过向各利害相关方开放征询意见，提出了一整套问题解决的框架方案[1]。但其过程却不无挑战与争议，迄今为止，方案的执行还没有进入议事日程[2]。

 

方案争议的焦点有两个，其一，一些人指出，最终形成的方案文字表述中，提出在社会补偿中适用“无过错”责任原则，就是要免除官员的责任[3]；虽经一再解释，他们的“理解”依然是，必须追究相关（官员）罪行，而无过错责任意味着免除了相关人员的罪行。这等于是将刑事责任的追究，强行作为民事赔偿的前提条件；

 

其二，持不同意见的人称，必须要把输血感染问题，和卖血感染问题一并予以赔偿解决；理由是输血感染的根源在于卖血（早先同意这一意见的主要是一些来自河南地区的既往卖血感染艾滋病的农民，在2011年7月4日北京红丝带论坛举办的输血感染艾滋病专家研讨会和同年12月13—14日的论坛大会上，北京爱知行研究所据信曾分别组织了一批河南的既往卖血者前往参会）[4]；持不同意见的人们还指出，如果只通过“无过错”责任进行赔偿，并只赔偿输血感染人群，那就是帮助政府在蓄意掩盖矛盾；

 

这里需要再次解释一下，什么是所谓“无过错”责任。无过错责任者（Liability without Fault），法学界又称为严格责任（Strict Liability）、无过失责任或者危险责任（德文：Gefa hrdungshaftang）。在不同法学者的研究中，也有学者将危险责任与无过错责任略有区分，危险责任更多为近现代以来发展出的新型的规则类型，内涵比无过错责任稍宽。但总体而言，危险责任、严格责任，均为无过错责任不同的学术称谓而已。

 

作为一个民法学上的一个术语，严格责任（无过错责任）主要用于侵权行为。意思是“没有过错也要赔偿”。从这个意义上讲，那些持认为在赔偿中适用“无过错”责任原则，就是要免除官员的责任的人士，完全是在不理解这一法律术语真实内涵的情况下，望文生义得出的结论，而且是完全理解反了。

进一步讲，无过错责任原则，是一个民事责任上的赔偿原则，不适用于刑事责任和行政责任，也就是说，那些有责任的官员，完全可以依照刑法予以处置，但同时那些有责任的机构或者个人，照样需要做出民事赔偿。

 

在输血感染的案例中，民事责任的主体是医院和血站，刑事、行政责任的主体，是一些官员，这完全可以分开同时平行处理。如果将刑事责任的追究，强行作为民事赔偿的前提条件，我的理解，客观上只能起到如下作用：

 

1、帮助医院血站及其背后的利益集团逃脱应当承担的巨额赔偿责任；因为刑事程序的启动可能遥遥无期；

 

2、一旦把赔偿的事件，上纲上线到追究责任，甚至是政治责任，那么就会触发一些“强力部门”的过问，开明派的人会缩回去，就不会有人敢碰这件事情；

 

3、高喊政治责任，总是有国际市场；在这种情况下，来自政府部门一些开明人士的同情和支持，就变成了“政府在背后指使”之类的负资产，这在实际上起到了加深国际社会和中国之间的相互误解的作用；

 

4、一旦事情解决不了，就可以岁岁年年提起，从而成为一直创造政治经济效益的“问题砝码”。客观上这显然也得益于中国长久以来将该问题当成政治禁忌的做法。

 

而所谓输血问题和卖血问题一并解决的观点，同样不成立。原因很简单，处理法律问题，需要同一个法律关系。输血问题的双方，是输血的医院（供血的血站，第八因子生产商），以及受血的受害者；而卖血感染的法律关系十分复杂，实际上是组织卖血的血头，和卖血的农民间，缔结非法购血合同，在操作时，出现交叉感染（侵权事故），血头及其背后的人（官员等）应当受到惩处。所以，两个不同的法律关系，如何一并赔偿处理？因为赔偿的主体，都不一致。事实上，如果成功地处理了输血感染赔偿这一棘手的问题，那就会为卖血赔偿问题积累经验和政治互信，当然，我们同样不排除，这两个赔偿同时平行进行；但我反对，将二者捆绑作为赔偿前提，这样做或者这样建议，实际上是要使得问题更加难以解决。

 

正是基于后工业化时代“严格责任”的理论，我们提出了相关的问题解决方案，以供各利害相关方和政府决策部门参考。需要指出的是，我们必须面对现代社会带来的一系列风险，尤其是公共卫生风险。而应对的方法有两种，一种是通过事前和事中的程序，尽力控制这种风险的产生；而另一种，就是在这些风险一旦不幸发生时，如何通过制度化的机制，对于受害者予以补偿，以实现社会正义，保持社会的正常运转。检讨和审视我们过去在输血感染艾滋病问题上政策应对的得失，并逐渐通过正视这一问题，找到问题解决的方案，将有利于我们为应对未来的不确定性和各种公共卫生挑战，提供一个全新的视角。

 

本期的公共卫生治理（原全球基金观察）电子期刊，刊出2011年3月由贾平主笔起草的《关于建立中国经血液感染艾滋病病毒者社会补偿机制的方案》核心方案，而最终形成的方案完全版由于篇幅较长，读者可参阅所列http://www.bjrrforum.org/或http://www.cgfwatch.org/files/A.pdf。

 

 

公共卫生治理项目首席执行官    贾平执笔

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

政策建议：关于建立中国经血液感染艾滋病病毒者社会补偿机制的核心方案

 

1. 背景

 

我国经血液感染艾滋病案例分为三种类型，一是上世纪90年代在以河南为中心的多省市农村地区因农民卖血后回输红血球而导致的交叉感染艾滋病病毒；二是通过非法商业卖血采集的血液送到各地血站和医院后，因手术输血等原因（很多案例是强制输血）而导致的感染；三是血友病患者因注射第八因子感染（多数感染案例源于上海生物制品研究所生产的该种血制品）。本办法草案指向的经血液感染艾滋病病毒者，主要是因上述第二和第三种原因导致感染的人群。

 

1. 基本原则

 

1. 公平责任原则

出于历史原因，经血液感染艾滋病案例数量较大，但现今仍存活者数量已经有限。经血液感染艾滋病的证据往往不足，难以认定责任。但经血液感染艾滋病病毒中受血者是受害者，理应获得赔偿，拒绝给予赔偿是不公正的，建立经血液感染艾滋病病毒社会赔偿机制的目的，就是为了以妥善的方法实现公正，让受害者得到合理的赔偿。故本框架草案提倡公平责任原则，即无论输血方（侵权方）是否有过错，感染艾滋病病毒的受血方都可以获得一定的补偿；

 

1. 包容性原则

尽可能将经血液感染的案例包含进本社会补偿机制的调整对象，使得补偿机制具有包容性；

 

1. 有限性原则与相称原则

本补偿机制为社会补偿性质，不能作为司法判决赔偿和国家赔偿的替代，其资源

有一定的限度，因而不能保证对所有的对象进行完全补偿；

 

在解决经血液感染艾滋病病毒的赔偿问题过程中，补偿与损伤的程度要相称；补偿可能会给其他利益攸关者增加一些负担，但这种负担的增加是为了促进整个社会的利益，因而负担的增加是必要的，并且这种负担不是很重；

 

1. 共济原则

在解决经血液感染艾滋病病毒的补偿问题过程中，各利益攸关者（包括受血的受害者、受害者家庭、供血者或血站、输血的医疗机构、卫生行政机构等）应该和衷共济，设身处地地考虑对方的情况，共同为妥善解决这个问题贡献自己的力量；

 

1. 应急优先原则

根据经血液感染艾滋病病毒者的个体和家庭具体状况，以及其合理的需求，考虑补偿的优先次序；

 

1. 补偿申请人申请资格的确定

 

本补偿机制面向所有在中国大陆境内经血液感染艾滋病病毒的人群，而这一人群（补偿对象）的确定，则需要确认输血行为或者注射第八因子的行为存在及其与感染艾滋病病毒有着直接因果关系。

 

因此，有资格向本社会补偿机制提出补偿的主体须符合以下条件中的任何一种：

1. 申请人已获得法院赔偿判决，但该判决没有得到执行或者没有得到完全执行的；

 

1. 申请人经调解达成赔偿协议后，赔偿协议没有得到执行或者没有得到完全执行的；

 

1. 申请人诉权无法得到行使（如法院拒绝受理，不予立案的），但可以提供病历和证明经血液感染艾滋病病毒因果关系相关证据的；

 

1. 法院裁定驳回起诉或者裁定不予受理的,但可以提供病历和证明经血液感染艾滋病病毒因果关系相关证据的；

 

1. 申请人没有充足的证据资料证明自身感染艾滋病病毒与输血行为或者注射第八因子的行为有直接因果关系，但通过尽职调查，发现有合理的依据（包括医学或者流行病学依据）能够证明该种因果关系存在的；

 

适格的申请人已经死亡，或者在申请过程中亡故的，可由其第一顺位继承人作为申请人；无第一顺位继承人的，第二顺位继承人作为申请人，依次类推。经血液感染艾滋病病毒者未成年的，由其监护人代为申请人。

 

1. 专家组审查

 

因果关系确定后，则初步具备申请补偿的资格，这一申请资格的确定应是由相关专家组成的委员会来行使。专家组应当依据事先确定的程序审查核实申请人递交的相关材料，并展开尽职调查，这些材料包括但不限于：

1. 法院的相关司法判决与裁定及相关司法文书；

 

1. 相关的调解或者赔偿／补偿协议及相关法律文本或者支持性文件；

 

1. 病历及医学检查之证明；

 

1. 中央及地方疾病控制机构或者医院留存的相关档案资料，包括流行病学调查的名单；申请人作为感染者的相关信息资料证明；申请人作为感染者的毒株类型以及其他涉及感染原因链的医学或者流行病学证据；

 

1. 相关证人证明；

 

1. 其他能够证明申请人经血液感染艾滋病病毒的合理依据；

 

确认因果关系，要排除受血者通过其他途径，而非输血途径或者注射第八因子感染艾

滋病病毒；要排除输血机构（医院）所输血液为其他来源血液，而非血站提供血液等等。

 

1. 补偿金额之确定

 

需要确定补偿内容，确定补偿金额。补偿可以包括：

1. 收入的损失或/和就业机会的丧失；

 

1. 个人及其家庭对于药物和医疗服务的支出（包括补助机会性感染治疗费用）；

 

1. 如受害者为家庭主要劳动力，则应补偿因患艾滋病死亡后对家庭的救助；

 

1. 如受害者为儿童，则需要考虑其22岁之前的入学或者培训等合理的费用开支。

 

1. 因感染艾滋病病毒使得个人或者家庭陷入生活困难的，可以考虑补偿个人或者其亡故后核心家庭成员的低保费用；

 

1. 责任之扣减

 

社会补偿机制并不构成对于司法程序和政府其他补偿程序的替代；但申请人通过本社会补偿机制获得社会补偿后，除非在司法判决或者政府等赔偿／补偿中已经明示，该申请人通过法院获得赔偿判决或者通过政府等相关部门获得赔偿或者补偿的，其获得的社会补偿应当从该赔偿判决或者政府相关部门的赔偿或补偿总额中予以扣除（减）。

 

1. 侵权方申请

 

被认定赔偿责任的侵权方没有能力向感染艾滋病病毒的受血方提供法院判决确定的赔偿数额，或者无法履行就赔偿或者补偿问题与经血液感染艾滋病病毒者达成的（调解或者和解）协议的，可以通过一定的程序向本社会补偿机制提出资金申请以履行自己的赔偿或者补偿责任。但该侵权方应该：

1. 依照约定在合理的时间内向本补偿机制归还相应的资金，或者；

 

1. 通过政府转移支付的方式向本补偿机制归还相应的资金以冲销欠款，或者；

 

1. 提供担保或抵押，由本补偿机制通过拍卖或者变卖的方式获得应归还的相应的资金；

 

1. 建立起建立“经血液感染艾滋病病毒问题协调机制”

 

1. 牵头筹建有血站工作人员、艾滋病专家、生命伦理学家、律师、社会组织、感染者或者感染者家属代表、政府工作人员（包括司法人员）参加的“经血液感染艾滋病赔偿机制工作委员会”，并制订经血液感染艾滋病赔偿机制或办法。

 

1. 建立“经血液感染艾滋病病毒问题专家组”机制，来履行审查适格的社会补偿申请人资格；展开尽职调查；对“经血液感染艾滋病赔偿机制工作委员会”负责。成员可以包括：
2. 1－2名律师／法律界人士
3. 1－2名公共卫生界人士
4. 1－2名伦理学人士
5. 1名感染者或者社会组织代表
6. 1名政府或者血站／医院代表

小组成员除感染者代表和政府代表外(另行规定)，其他成员的选择应该遵循利害冲突规避原则。

 

小组最后形成尽职调查报告，递交给“经血液感染艾滋病赔偿机制工作委员会”。

 

1. 建立“经血液感染艾滋病病毒问题社会补偿评估小组”机制，对“经血液感染艾

滋病赔偿机制工作委员会”负责并独立展开资金等补偿评估工作。

成员可以包括：

• 1－2名财务界人士
• 1－2名律师；
• 1－2名司法界人士；
• 1－2名政府／血站人士；
• 1－2名感染者／社会组织人士；

 

小组最后形成社会补偿金额评估报告，递交给“经血液感染艾滋病赔偿机制工作委员会”。

 

                                                                      公共卫生治理项目首席执行官    贾平执笔

                                                                      本文载于《公共卫生治理》电子期刊第一期

 

以下是英文版：

Break a New Path through “Brambles and Thorns”to Compensate People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood

 

Infection of HIV (and/or HBV, HCV) through contaminated blood remains a challenge without proper solution in the past decades in mainland China. Concerns and negative reactions from both domestic and international community has been a long time trouble for government especially local authorities due to its “simple and rude” method in dealing with such issue while lack of enough transparency. Since 2010, an independent experts’ team consists of ethic scholars, legal researchers, lawyers and health professionals has been organized and after long time research, proposed a comprehensive compensation plan[1]for the problem solution. The sensitivity of the issue makes it a hard journey with controversies for the experts’ team and lead to the stagnation of implementation of the compensation plan[2].

 

There are two controversial points about the above-mentioned plan. First, as some people argued, the “no fault liability” proposed in the compensation plan as a basic compensation principle would rather means “exempt those criminal government officers from being punished”[3]. Despite repeated explanations from the experts’ team, they insisted that the government officers who constituted crimes on the issue must be brought to justice and the word “no fault” means no mistake thus no crime. This implies that the prosecution for those “government officers” or related people’s criminal liability should be regarded as a precondition for civil liability for compensation of tort, rather as a parallel one.

 

Second, people argued or were encouraged to argue that blood transfusion compensation should work along with compensation for infected with HIV through blood selling in the same proposed plan (some farmer representatives who infected with HIV through blood selling in Henan were main supporters of the argument although they changed their opinion later. It was believed that Beijing AIZHIXING Institute has organized dozens of those farmer representatives from Henan to join the experts’ conference on infection of HIV/AIDS through contaminated blood in July 4, 2011 and then in December 12-13, 2011 joined the Beijing Red Ribbon Forum’s Annual Plenary on Blood Transfusion)[4]. The arguments said if the compensation does not cover the PLHIV through blood selling, which would mean to help the government to hide or window-dress the contradictions.

 

Here we should again make explanation for the so called “no fault” liability, which legal academia also called “strict liability” or Dangerous liability (Gefa hrdungshaftang in German). In general, they are the different academic terminology for the same principle of identification of responsibility in torts, although dangerous liability may be broader to some extent under different context.

 

As a terminology of Civil Law (Torts), the Strict Liability (No Fault Liability) actually means “compensation even without any fault subjectively”, which means the argument above was totally wrong (and a opposing perception actually) due to lack of fully understanding of the terminology.

 

Further, as a civil law liability principle, the Strict Liability as a principle can not apply to Criminal Liability or Administrative liability, which means the so called government officers whose behavior constituted criminal offense can be punished through criminal procedure while at the same time the civil liability of compensation should not be exempted.

 

In the case of blood transfusion, the subject of the civil liability are the hospitals, blood stations, while those decision makers or government officers are the Subject of criminal liability. The civil liability and criminal/administrative liability could be processed respectively. If the investigation of criminal liability be regarded as the precondition of the civil one, from my understanding, it can only lead to the following consequences to a large extent:

 

1. The hospitals, blood stations and the interests group behind may take advantage to escape from the huge amount of compensation liability, or just postpone it as the initiation of criminal procedure is extreme hard due to the sensitive circumstance till now while people infected of HIV are dying;

 

1. Once the civil compensation liability become investigating of Criminal liability or, as some people claimed publicly, the political responsibility of the government officers involved since 20 years ago, the result can only be the suspension of processing the civil compensation plan and even those open-minded government officers who supported the plan had to step back due to scare of the intervention from some government entities (which actually happened)；

 

1. It seems there is always a big market for claiming of “political responsibility of Chinese Government” internationally, under such background the support or sympathy from some government officers will be interpreted as “Government instigated or Government ordered” as always and thus increase the mutual misunderstanding between China and the international community；

 

1. If the problem can’t be solved---or any possible solution is in stagnation, the problem itself will become a “weight” for “political and economical interests” from time to time or even “permanently” in the foreseeable future. Once the civil compensation plan for blood transfusion prove to be a “stillborn fetus”, then there would be concerns on  China taking no action on this human rights violation challenge while China itself still regard it as a political taboo thus make it the source of new problems.

 

The argument of combining compensation for blood transfusion and blood selling together is also a problematic one. According to civil law theory, the legal problem can only be solved within one “legal relation” (or Rechtsverhaltnis in German). The two different legal relations can’t be solved together, for the subject or the object of the legal relation will be totally different. For the blood transfusion, the legal relation is between the hospitals (or blood stations/companies which produce the VIII Factor) and the victims of the blood transfusion (people who infected with HIV). The legal relation of the blood selling is between “blood heads” who organized the blood selling and those who sell their blood and thus infected with HIV (mainly farmers in the Central China) and thus much more complicated. The interests group behind the blood heads such as the corruptive government officers should be punished but the different legal relations make it impossible to combine with the civil compensation together. In fact, if the compensation plan for blood transfusion proves to be a successful story, more meaningful experience will be gained and political trust will be built for blood selling compensation in the near future. We do not agree with that the compensation of blood transfusion should be combined with blood selling problems, for that is a mission impossible - sometimes, “killing two birds with one stone” strategy does not work for its goal, On the other hand, we do not exclude any possibility of processing the two “compensation” separately and in parallel”.

 

We have to face with a series of non-traditional crisis, among which is challenge of public health. There are two approaches in dealing with this kind of crisis: one is trying to control or reduce the risks through a series of procedures before it happens, another is to compensate through a reasonable mechanism after the crisis become reality so as to achieve the social justice. Based on the legal theory of “Strict Liability” in post-industrial era, we proposed the plan for problem solution: to both stakeholders and decision makers. To review and double check the public policy in dealing with the HIV infection through blood transfusion in the past will definitely help us to find a new mechanism for problem solving and thus provide a new perspective in dealing with public health challenges in the future. But what more important is, as the story of compensation plan mentioned above show to us, is how to reach consensus under the much more complicated social environment in China.

 

This issue of Health Governance E-Newsletter (previously China Global Fund Watch E-Newsletter) publishes the Establishment of Compensation Mechanism of People Infected with HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood which is the core plan of the compensation plan mentioned above. Readers can find the full text of the Compensation Plan (Chinese Version) through the linkage http://www.bjrrforum.org/ or http://www.cgfwatch.org/files/A.pdf.

 

                                                                                                                      By Jia Ping, CEO of the Health Governance Initiative

 

 

Policy Recommendations: Core Plan of the Establishment of Compensation Mechanism of People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood

   政策建议：关于建立中国经血液感染艾滋病病毒者社会补偿机制的核心方案

 

1. Background

Three types of cases of people infected by blood contaminated with HIV/AIDS can be found in mainland China. The first type is the infection through retro-transfusion of erythrocytes (Red Cell) after trading blood in rural areas in many cities and provinces which are centered in Henan. The second type is the exposure through surgery transfusion by contaminated blood from illegal blood trade, among those many of which are compulsive transfusion.  The last type of exposure concerns hemophiliacs who came into contact with infection during their treatment which requires injection of a blood product called FVIII (Factor VIII), many of those coming from Shanghai Institute of Biological Products.

 

1. Fundamental Principles
2. Fair Responsibility

The number of People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood is huge, but for some historical reasons the survivors are quite limited. The blood recipients that got infected are victims, therefore the compensation is justified. It is groundless to reject their request. The aim to establish the mechanism of social compensation is to implement justice by insuring victims justifiable compensation. As a result, the principle of fair responsibility is highlighted-the compensation is guaranteed to People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood, whether the blood provider is faulty or not.

 

1. Inclusiveness

The goal of this program should be to maximize the amount of compensation distributed.

 

1. Limitation and Relevance/Proportionality

Due to the social nature of the mechanism in this draft, the compensation shall not be a substitute to judiciary and state compensation. The full compensation cannot be guaranteed to all victims because of the limited resources.

The compensation should be proportionate to the infection/damage. Other stakeholders might bear extra “burden” because of the compensation, but the “burden” is to enhance the welfare of the society as a whole, therefore it is quite necessary, and better, affordable.

 

1. Cooperativeness

All stakeholders should be cooperative in compensating People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood

 

1. Priority

The order of compensation should be prioritized based on the financial status of the victims/families and personal request.

 

1. Qualification of Compensation Applicants

Compensation should be available to all those infected by contaminated blood in mainland China.  The key step is to insure the existence of transfusion or injection of The Eighth Factor, and its direct causal relationship to HIV/AIDS infection.

As a result, applicants for the compensation should qualify any of the criteria as follow:

1. The applicant has already received the verdict of compensation by court, but the verdict is not, or not fully carried into execution.
2. The applicant has reached the compensation agreement after mediation, but the agreement is not, or fully carried into execution.
3. The right of suit of applicant cannot be exercised (e.g. rejected by the court, denied registration), but the applicant can provide medical records and statements as evidences to prove the causal relationship between the infection and injection of contaminated blood.
4. The applicant’s request has been overruled or ruled not to be registered by the court, but the applicant can provide medical records and statements as evidences to prove the causal relationship between the infection and injection of contaminated blood.
5. The applicant can’t provide enough evidence to prove the causal relationship between the infection and injection of contaminated blood or The Eighth Factor, but adequate evidence (including medical or epidemic evidence) is found through investigation to prove the causal relationship between the infection and injection of contaminated blood.

 

In case of death of qualified applicant, or death during the application, the first successor in order shall become the legitimate applicant. Should there be no first successor in order, the second successor in order shall become the applicant, so on so forth. If the infected individual is under 18, the guardian shall become the acting applicant.

 

1. Expert Examination

Once the causal relationship is confirmed, the applicant is qualified with preliminary condition. The applicant qualification shall be decided and confirmed by the committee consisted of experts specializing in relevant areas. The expert committee should examine and inspect the application materials based on pre-established procedures.

 

The required application materials shall include, but are not limited to:

1. Judicial decision and documents;
2. Mediation on compensation/agreement, or legal text, or supporting document
3. Medical records and medical examination certificate
4. Documents from Central and local hospitals or CDCs, including the list of epidemiological research; proof of applicant as a PLWHA; the virulent strain type that applicant carries, and medical or epidemiological evidence of infection.
5. Witness Testimony
6. Other evidence that gives a reasonable basis for verifying the infection through contaminated blood.
7. In order to confirm the causal relationship, it is important to eliminate the possibility of exposure through other resources.

 

1. Compensation Amount

The range and amount of compensation are to be confirmed, which include

1. Loss of income and vocational opportunity
2. Personal and family cost on medicine and medical services (including cost on opportunistic infection)
3. If the victim is the family primary income provider, the compensation for victim family should be provided after victim's death.
4. If the victim's age is below 18, the expense of education or training before 22 years old shall be taken into consideration when compensating.
5. If the infection leads to economic crisis for individual or family, the compensation may cover the basic cost of living of core family members after the victim's death.

 

1. Responsibility Deduction

The social compensation mechanism is not a substitute to judicial and other state procedures of compensation. However, if the applicant receives social compensation from this mechanism and judicial or state compensation, the amount of the social compensation shall be deducted from the total amount of the latter two ways, unless the agreement states otherwise.

 

1. Application of Tort Party

The tort party unable to provide People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood compensation amount decided by court, or cannot reach the agreement on compensation to People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood, shall apply through certain procedure to the Mechanism for allowance to perform his duty. However, the tort party should:

1. Return the amount of the allowance to the Mechanism in appointed time, or
2. Return the amount of the allowance through government transfer payment to write it off, or
3. Provide warrant or mortgage for auction or disposal in exchange of the compensation amount.

 

1. Establishing Coordination Mechanism of People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood
2. Coordination Mechanism of People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood is to be established, consisted of workers from blood band, experts in HIV/AIDS, (ethics) scholars, lawyers, social organization, representatives of PLWHA and their families, government staff (including judicial personnel). The compensation mechanism of People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood is to be formulated.
3. A team of experts is to be established to evaluate the candidateship of the qualified applicants. Thorough inspection is to be initiated. The expert mechanism is responsible for the working committee. The expert mechanism may be consisted of:
4. 1-2 lawyers/legal professionals
5. 1-2 professionals in public health
6. 1-2 scholars in ethnics
7. 1 representative of PLWHAs or social organization
8. 1 representative of government, blood band or hospital

 

Choice of members should accord with the principle of avoidance except for the representatives of PLWHAs and government.

 

The members of the mechanism should submit inspection report to the working committee.

 

1. The assessment mechanism of People Infected by HIV/AIDS Contaminated Blood is to be established, and be responsible for the working committee. The assessment group shall assess the compensation independently.

 

The members can be:

• 1-2 financial professionals
• 1-2 lawyers
• 1-2 legal professionals
• 1-2 government staff/ workers of blood bank
• 1-2 representatives of PLWHAs/social organization

 

The members of the mechanism should submit assessment report to the working committee.

 

 

                         By Jia Ping, CEO of the Health Governance Initiative