Is due diligence a standard to hold States responsible for their acts during the covid-19 outbreak? – the brazilian case

Abstract

Due diligence is a plastic standard, it varies according to the risk level of the situation and the State’s current technical, financial and human resources. Nevertheless, States are responsible for prevent, mitigate, or even stop a grave harm such as a viral pandemic, regardless of their (lack of) health infrastructure. To the COVID-19 pandemic, we will investigate the possible application of four due diligence duties: i) the no-harm principle; ii) the duty to protect the rights to health and to life; iii) the International Health Regulations’ obligations; and iv) the responsibility to protect victims of disasters. What must States legally do to stop or mitigate the pandemic’s effects, as well as to prevent it from coming back in the future? Have States failed so far to prevent or halt the spread of the disease once they knew about its risks? In Brazil, the Federal Government’s denialism encouraged the pandemic’s spread and put millions of people at risk. The State rejected advices from health specialists, fired many health ministers, quarreled with governors who tried to implement health