DOCSLIB.ORG

Report to the Government of Montenegro on the Visit To

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Report to the Government of Montenegro on the Visit To CPT/Inf (2019) 2 Report to the Government of Montenegro on the visit to Montenegro carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 9 to 16 October 2017 The Government of Montenegro has requested the publication of this report and of its response. The Government’s response is set out in document CPT/Inf (2019) 3. Strasbourg, 7 February 2019 - 2 - CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 4 I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 8 A. The visit, the report and follow-up.......................................................................................... 8 B. Context of the visit and cooperation encountered ................................................................. 9 C. Immediate observations under Article 8, paragraph 5, of the Convention....................... 10 II. FACTS FOUND DURING THE VISIT AND ACTION PROPOSED .............................. 11 A. Police establishments .............................................................................................................. 11 1. Preliminary remarks ........................................................................................................ 11 2. Torture and other forms of ill-treatment ......................................................................... 12 3. Investigations into allegations of ill-treatment ................................................................ 14 4. Safeguards against ill-treatment of persons deprived of their liberty ............................. 19 5. Monitoring and complaints procedures ........................................................................... 22 6. Conditions of detention ................................................................................................... 23 B. Prison establishments ............................................................................................................. 25 1. Preliminary remarks ........................................................................................................ 25 a. overcrowding ......................................................................................................... 25 b. prison establishments visited ................................................................................. 26 2. Ill-treatment ..................................................................................................................... 27 3. Conditions of detention and regime ................................................................................ 29 a. Institution for Sentenced Prisoners (KPD) ............................................................ 29 b. Remand Prison ....................................................................................................... 30 c. Bijelo Polje Prison ................................................................................................. 32 d. juveniles and young adults .................................................................................... 33 4. Health-care services ........................................................................................................ 35 5. Other issues of relevance to the CPT’s mandate ............................................................. 39 a. prison staff ............................................................................................................. 39 b. means of restraint ................................................................................................... 40 c. discipline ................................................................................................................ 42 d. contact with the outside world ............................................................................... 44 - 3 - e. complaints and inspection procedures ................................................................... 45 f. transport of detainees ............................................................................................. 46 C. Psychiatric establishments ..................................................................................................... 47 1. Preliminary remarks ........................................................................................................ 47 2. Ill-treatment ..................................................................................................................... 49 3. Patients’ living conditions ............................................................................................... 50 4. Treatment ........................................................................................................................ 52 5. Staff ................................................................................................................................. 54 6. Means of restraint ............................................................................................................ 55 7. Safeguards ....................................................................................................................... 58 D. Komanski Most Institution for Persons with Special Needs............................................... 62 1. Preliminary remarks ........................................................................................................ 62 2. Ill-treatment ..................................................................................................................... 63 3. Residents’ living conditions ............................................................................................ 63 4. Staff and care ................................................................................................................... 64 5. Means of restraint ............................................................................................................ 66 6. Safeguards ....................................................................................................................... 68 E. Ljubović Centre for Juveniles ............................................................................................... 70 1. Preliminary remarks ........................................................................................................ 70 2. Residents’ living conditions ............................................................................................ 71 3. Staff and care ................................................................................................................... 72 4. Means of restraint ............................................................................................................ 74 5. Safeguards ....................................................................................................................... 75 6. Other issues ..................................................................................................................... 75 APPENDIX I: List of the establishments visited by the CPT’s delegation ................................................. 77 APPENDIX II: List of the national authorities, other bodies and non-governmental organisations with which the CPT's delegation held consultations ........................................................... 78 - 4 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the course of the 2017 visit the CPT’s delegation reviewed the treatment of persons deprived of their liberty by the police and the conditions of detention of inmates in the country’s two prison facilities. The delegation also examined the treatment of psychiatric patients at Dobrota Special Psychiatric Hospital and Podgorica Psychiatric Clinic, and conducted follow-up visits to Komanski Most Institute for People with Special Needs and Ljubovic Centre for Juveniles. On the whole, the CPT’s delegation received excellent co-operation during the visit from the Montenegrin authorities at all levels. That said, when it comes to the implementation of its previous recommendations, the report notes that several long-standing issues remain unaddressed. For example, the lack of implementation in practice of fundamental legal safeguards against ill- treatment for persons deprived of their liberty by the police; inappropriate and prolonged resort to mechanical restraint using metal hand- and ankle-cuffs to fixate inmates to beds in prison establishments; and continued overcrowding and poor conditions at Dobrota Special Psychiatric Hospital. On these latter two issues, the CPT’s delegation made immediate observations at the end of the visit. Law enforcement The report notes some overall improvement since the 2013 visit in the treatment of persons detained by the police. Nevertheless, a significant number of allegations of physical ill-treatment by police officers were received. The alleged ill-treatment consisted of punches, slaps, kicks, baton blows and strikes with non-standard objects and the infliction of electro-shocks from hand-held electrical discharge devices. This was said to have occurred either at the time of apprehension or during the pre-investigation phase for the purpose of extracting confessions. The Committee concludes that persons deprived of their liberty in Montenegro still run an appreciable risk of being ill-treated by the police and that there is the need for the police senior management to enforce a multi-faceted strategy
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Implementing Health 2020: 2012 – 2014 Regional Committee for Europe EUR/RC64/8 Rev
    REGIONAL COMMITTEE FOR EUROPE 64TH SESSION Copenhagen, Denmark, 15–18 September 2014 © iStock © iStock © iStock Implementing Health 2020: 2012 – 2014 Regional Committee for Europe EUR/RC64/8 Rev. 1 64th session Copenhagen, 15–18 September 2014 24 July 2014 140461 Provisional agenda item 5(a) ORIGINAL: ENGLISH Implementing Health 2020: 2012–2014 This document describes progress made in implementing Health 2020, the European health policy framework adopted by the WHO Regional Committee for Europe at its sixty-second session in 2012. The Regional Office work taking forward the implementation of the Health 2020 vision across the Region was principally focused on promoting awareness of the Health 2020 and its support studies; integrating Health 2020 values, principles and approaches with every aspect of the technical and planning work of the Regional Office; building capacity for implementation especially at country level; building strategic partnerships with key international agencies and bodies and supporting countries at national and sub-national levels implement Health 2020 through aligning and developing policies and reinforcing Health 2020 perspectives in the implementation of key strategies and plans. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe UN City, Marmorvej 51, DK-2100 Copenhagen ø, Denmark Tel.: +45 45 33 70 00 Fax: +45 45 33 70 01 Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.euro.who.int/en/who-we-are/governance Contents Implementing Health 2020: 2012–2014 1 Awareness and dissemination of Health 2020 and the main
    [Show full text]
  • HEALTH PROMOTION and DISEASE PREVENTION a Handbook For
    Health Promotion And Disease Prevention HEALTH PROMOTION AND DISEASE PREVENTION A Handbook for Teachers, Researchers, Health Professionals and Decision Makers Implementation of the New Public Health Principles: Case Title Study of Montenegro Module: 1.9.5 ECTS: 0.25 Author(s), degrees, Agima Ljaljevic, MD, PhD, Assistant Professor institution(s) Institute of Public Healt, Podgorica, Montenegro Address for Agima Ljaljevic, MD, PhD, Assistant Professor correspondence Institute of Public Health Ljubljanska bb, Podgorica, Montenegro Tel: +382 81 412 803 / 382 67 266 795 E-mail: [email protected] Key words public health, Montenegro, health indicators, health care system, health promotion, healthy life style, health policy Learning objectives • Presenting situation in the field of public health in Montenegro. • Description of health policy development in the future • Basic problems in population health status related to life styles 220 Implementation of the New Public Health Principles: Case Study of Montenegro Abstract According to the survey in 2003, 617,749 of inhabitants live in the Republic of Montenegro, and 62% of them live in urban area. Since 1950, changes have been marked in rates of demographic indicators especially significant for the presentation of getting population older, on the territory of Montenegro. The tendency of the rate decrease of born alive, of vital index and increase of expected life’s length are evident, as well as the average age of the population and the index of getting older of the population. Development of the new public health is priority in health policy in Montenegro and Institute of Public Health is the base for the implementation of principles in new public health as an ethical issue which is related to health expenditures, priorities and social philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Services Delivery: a Concept Note
    Health services delivery: a concept note Juan Tello Erica Barbazza Working document Health services delivery: a concept note Working document October 2015 Juan Tello and Erica Barbazza Health Services Delivery Programme WHO Regional Office for Europe Abstract In order for health services delivery to accelerate gains in health outcomes it must continuously adapt and evolve according to the changing health landscape. At present, the case for change is a compelling one. However, despite mounting attention put to reforming health services delivery, there remains a persisting lack of consensus on its conceptualization. This paper aims to take stock of the developments in the literature on health services delivery and lessons from the firsthand experiences of countries, viewing clarity on the performance, processes and system dynamics of health services delivery a prerequisite for the rollout, scale-up and sustainability of reforms. Through a mixed-methods approach, evidence from existing frameworks and tools for measuring services delivery, country case examples and commissioned papers have been reviewed around three key questions: what are the outcomes of health services delivery? How can the health services delivery function be defined? And, how do other health system functions enable the conditions for health services delivery? Keywords DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE, INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS EUROPE Address requests about publications of the WHO Regional Office for Europe to: Publications WHO Regional Office for Europe UN City, Marmorvej 51 DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark Alternatively, complete an online request form for documentation, health information, or for permission to quote or translate, on the Regional Office website (http://www.euro.who.int/pubrequest).
    [Show full text]
  • Radiating Knowledge
    Division Health, Education, Social Protection Radiating knowledge How a core of experts based in Croatia is boosting HIV surveillance across Eastern Europe, Central Asia and beyond WHO Collaborating Centre Knowledge Hub for Capacity Development in HIV Surveillance HI IDS Knowledge Hub for Capacity Development in HIV Surveillance Content 1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . 3 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 4 3. INTRODUCTION . 6 Aims of report . 6 Severe epidemics harming region . 6 Weak surveillance undermines response . 7 4. CAPACITY BUILDING FOR SURVEILLANCE . 9 Tasks, work strategies and structure . 9 Regional Knowledge Hubs . 9 Knowledge Hub for Capacity Development in HIV Surveillance . 9 Capacity development defined . 11 Benefits of a regional approach . 12 Evaluation of capacity development for surveillance . 12 5. RESULTS . 14 Outputs . 14 Outcomes: Case studies . 17 Case study 1: Ukraine . 17 Case study 2: Sub-regional transfer of knowledge in south-east Europe . 19 Case study 3: North Africa and the Middle East . .20 6. LESSONS LEARNT . 23 Further investment would pay major dividends . 24 7. RECOMMENDATIONS . 25 8. REFERENCES . 26 9. ABBREVIATIONS . 27 Annex I: Table 1. Training courses delivered since 2004 . 28 Annex II: Table 2. Numbers per country attending Knowledge Hub training courses . 30 Published by: Responsible: Deutsche Gesellschaft für WHO Collaborating Centre and Knowledge Hub for Capacity Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH Development in HIV Surveillance Dag-Hammarskjöld-Weg 1-5 Andrija Stamparˇ School of Public Health, School of Medicine 65760 Eschborn. Germany Rockefellerova 4, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia T +49 (0) 61 96 79-0 T +385 (0) 1 4590 142/147 F +49 (0) 61 96 79-1115 F +385 (0) 1 4684 406 I www.gtz.de I www.surveillancezagreb.org German BACKUP Initiative Strategic Information and Research, HIV/AIDS Department World Health Organization 20, Avenue Appia CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland I www.who.int/hiv 2 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Report Fifth SEE Meeting Podgorica Dec 2009
    The WHO Regional Office for Europe SITUATION ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SYSTEMS IN THE SOUTH EAST EUROPE REPORT OF THE FIFTH MEETING OF THE SOUTH-EASTERN EUROPEAN NETWORK ON WORKERS’ HEALTH The World Health Organization (WHO) is a PODGORICA, REPUBLIC OF MONTENEGRO specialized agency of the United Nations created in 1 DECEMBER 2009 1948 with the primary responsibility for international health matters and public health. The WHO Regional Office for Europe is one of six regional offices throughout the world, each with its own programme geared to the particular health conditions of the countries it serves. Member States Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Situation analysis and Italy Kazakhstan recommendations for Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lithuania occupational health systems Luxembourg Malta in the South East Europe Monaco Montenegro Netherlands Norway Poland Report of the Fifth Meeting of Portugal Republic of Moldova the South-Eastern European Romania Russian Federation San Marino Network on Workers’ Health Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Turkey Turkmenistan Ukraine United Kingdom Uzbekistan Podgorica, Republic of Montenegro 1 December 2009 World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe Scherfigsvej 8, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark Tel.: +45 39 17 17 17. Fax: +45 39 17 18 18. E-mail: [email protected] Web site: www.euro.who.int Situation analysis and recommendations for occupational health systems in the South East Europe Report of the Fifth Meeting of the South-Eastern European Network on Workers’ Health Podgorica, Republic of Montenegro 1 December 2009 ABSTRACT The Fifth meeting of the South-eastern European (SEE) Network on Workers’ Health was held in Podgorica, Republic of Montenegro, on 1 December 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue 5, October 2015
    ISSUE 5, OCTOBER 2015 Welcome to the UNECE newsletter for October 2015. This edition is focused on the work by UNECE to develop standard guidance (“Standards”) for the use of Public-Private Partnerships. Partnerships as a means of enabling development will be a key focus of the Sustainable Development Goals, and UNECE is developing a programme of work to support governments in their successful implementation. In this edition of the newsletter, we explore UNECE’s recent work in developing a Standard for PPP policy in the healthcare sector. In addition, there is coverage of a new format for cooperation in the Philippines which will see the ADEC Innovation Foundation with the support of the Philippine Government, providing support for the UNECE affiliated International Specialist Centre of Excellence for PPP in Health. This Centre amongst other things will support the work of various international Project Teams, PPP and Healthcare, ‘last building standing concept’ in the aftermath of a natural disaster, telemedicine and PPP organizational strengthening of hospitals. UNECE PPP NEWSLETTER | 1 MAIN STORY The United Nations Economic Commission for in responding to the clear need for hospitals, Europe (UNECE) is developing a UN Standard clinics, diagnostic facilities and other healthcare to provide guidance to governments planning to infrastructure, and it is particularly important use Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) to develop that the guidance is sustainable and relevant their healthcare infrastructure, improving access to small and medium
    [Show full text]
  • Indicators of the Effectiveness of the Health Care Financing System in the Western Balkan Countries-Critical Analyze
    VOJNOSANITETSKI PREGLED VOJNOMEDICINSKA AKADEMIJA Crnotravska 17, 11 000 Beograd, Srbija Tel/faks: +381 11 2669689 [email protected] ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Accepted manuscripts are the articles in press that have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication by the Editorial Board of the Vojnosanitetski Pregled. They have not yet been copy edited and/or formatted in the publication house style, and the text could still be changed before final publication. Although accepted manuscripts do not yet have all bibliographic details available, they can already be cited using the year of online publication and the DOI, as follows: article title, the author(s), publication (year), the DOI. Please cite this article INDICATORS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE HEALTH CARE FINANCING SYSTEM IN THE WESTERN BALKAN COUNTRIES- CRITICAL ANALYZE POKAZATELЈI EFIKASNOSTI SISTEMA FINANSIRANJA ZDRAVSTVENE ZAŠTITE U ZEMLЈAMA ZAPADNOG BALKANA-KRITIČKA ANALIZA Authors Vladislava Stojić*, Dr Jevto Eraković†, Dr Nela Eraković‡,Vojnosanitetski pregled (2020); Online First April, 2020. UDC: DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP191107046S When the final article is assigned to volumes/issues of the Journal, the Article in Press version will be removed and the final version appear in the associated published volumes/issues of the Journal. The date the article was made available online first will be carried over. 1 INDICATORS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE HEALTH CARE FINANCING SYSTEM IN THE WESTERN BALKAN COUNTRIES-CRITICAL ANALYZE POKAZATELЈI EFIKASNOSTI SISTEMA FINANSIRANJA ZDRAVSTVENE
    [Show full text]
  • Number 9 May 2020 U Ovom Broju
    PREPARED BY STUDENTS OF MASTER STUDY PROGRAM HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Number 9 May 2020 U ovom broju: • Health workers (physicians, nurses, dentists, pharmacist) density in Montenegro, • E-health in Montenegro, ANAMIRA LASICA RADOVIĆ • Role of the patient - centered health technologies in Montenegro, • Problems caused by temporary measures introduced in Montenegro and the world overall, MILICA MILETIĆ • Covid-19 call center activity report for period 20 March – 18 April 2020, NATALIJA DREKALOVIĆ, BOGDAN LABAN • ThePROF. structure DR DRAGAN of health LAUŠEVIĆ, system DR in Montenegro,ALEKSANDAR OBRADOVIĆ, DR MARIJA TODOROVIĆ, MR ENA GRBOVIĆ • Deaths attributable to air pollution in Montenegro, ŽELJKO MILIĆ • djelatnosti,LUKA MARAŠ Unapređenje aplikativnog rješenja eZdravlje uključivanjem stomatološke zdrastvene • NATAŠA DEVIĆ • MentalCiljevi i metode health statusskrininga in uMontenegro, zdravlju, NATAŠA ŽUGIĆ • Prevencija povreda i nasilja - kratak osvrt, NINA MILOVIĆ • Prevencija i rehabilitacija kardiovaskularnih bolesti, SVETLANA STOJANOVIĆ TIJANA LUČIĆ European Commission Erasmus+ Project: | PROJECT COORDINATOR: University of Donja 573997-EPP-1-2016-1-ME-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP Gorica This project has been funded with support from the | Donja Gorica, 81 000 Podgorica, Montenegro European Commission. | http://www.udg.edu.me This publication [communication] reflects the views | [email protected] only of the author, and the Commission cannot be | Tel:+382(0)20 410 777 held responsible for any use which may be made of | Fax:+382(0)20 410 766
    [Show full text]
  • Approaching Mental Health Care Reform Regionally: the Mental Health Project for South-Eastern Europe
    Approaching Mental Health Care Reform Regionally: The Mental Health Project for South-eastern Europe This report was produced for the SEE Mental Health Project, a programme of the SEE Health Network sup- ported by the WHO Regional Office for Europe. The editors and main writers were Desmond Maurer and Melita Murko, while the text was reviewed by Ms Vesna Purati}, Regional Project Manager of the SEE Mental Health Project, Dr Matthijs Muijen, Regional Adviser, Mental Health, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Dr Maria Haralanova, Regional Adviser, Public Health Services, SEE Health Network Secretariat, WHO Regional Office for Europe. Special thanks for their contributions are due to the nine Country Project Managers, Dr Zana Kokomani, Albania, Dr Joka Blagov~anin Simi}, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dr Hristo Hinkov, Bulgaria, Dr Neven Henigsberg, Croatia, Ms Tatijana Mandi} \uri{i}, Montenegro, Dr Larisa Boderskova, Republic of Moldova, Ms Raluca Nica, Romania, Dr Vladimir Jovi}, Serbia, and Dr Vladimir Ortakov, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. We would also like to acknowledge the use in the text of materials provided for various train- ing seminars and workshops by, amongst others, Dr Carlos Artundo, Mr Ray Baird, Professor Athanassios Constantopoulos, Dr Michelle Funk, Dr Margaret Grigg, Dr Paul O'Halloran, Dr Sla|ana [trkalj Ivezi}, Dr Matthijs Muijen, Dr Mario Reali, Dr Colin Rickard, and Professor Peter Ryan. Finally, we are grateful to Dr Judit Csiszar, Regional Director of Project HOPE Central and Eastern Europe, who provided the personnel and ad- ministrative support required for the production of this report. Design and layout were done by Graphic Studio Oskar.
    [Show full text]
  • Response of the Government of Montenegro to the Report of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman Or De
    CPT/Inf (2010) 4 Response of the Government of Montenegro to the report of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) on its visit to Montenegro from 15 to 22 September 2008 The Government of Montenegro has requested the publication of this response. The report of the CPT on its September 2008 visit to Montenegro is set out in document CPT/Inf (2010) 3. Strasbourg, 9 March 2010 Note: In accordance with Article 11, paragraph 3, of the Convention, certain names have been deleted. 3 CONTENTS Ministry of Internal Affairs and Public Administration------------------------------------------------------ 5 Ministry of Justice ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 Ministry of Health ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 25 Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 31 5 Ministry of Internal Affairs and Public Administration In relation to the Report of the European Committee for Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment about the Situation in Montenegro, forwarded with the request to submit requested information/comments, we are enclosing the replies from the Ministry of Interior Affairs and Public Administration and the Police Directorate. Assistant minister of interior affairs and public administration, Nada Vukanić and assistant director of the Police Directorate,
    [Show full text]
  • Germ an HIV Practice Collection
    German HIV Practice Collection treatment andcareacrosswholeregions How KnowledgeHubsareboostingHIVprevention, Regions ofexpertise Acknowledgements The German BACKUP Initiative would like to thank all agencies and individuals who contributed to this report. Chief among these are staff of the Knowledge Hubs, led by Ivana Božičević (HIV Surveillance, Zagreb); Shona Schonning (Harm Reduction, Vilnius); and James Smith, Zoya Shabarova and Inna Jurkevich (HIV Care and Treatment, Kiev and Moscow). Stipe Orešković, Zagreb Knowledge Hub; Anne Petitgirard, WHO HIV/AIDS Department; Ulrich Laukamm-Josten, WHO Regional Office for Europe; Gerlinde Reiprich, Health Focus+; and Emilis Subata and his team of social workers at the Vilnius Centre for Addictive Disorders, all took time to discuss aspects of the Hubs with the writer. Rolf Korte, Honorary Professor, Faculty of Medicine, Justus- Liebig-University, Giessen, Germany and Jason Wright, USAID Multilateral Team Leader and Liaison to Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria and Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, served as the peer reviewers. Peter Weis and Kristina Kloss at the BACKUP Initiative proposed this project and oversaw its develop- ment. James Boothroyd researched and wrote the report, and Anna von Roenne, Managing Editor of the German HIV Practice Collection, edited the document and oversaw production. Coverphoto: Epidemiologists and other public health professionals from Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Uganda and United Republic 2 of Tanzania attending a workshop
    [Show full text]
  • Governing for Health Equity and Sustainable Development in Montenegro
    GOVERNING FOR HEALTH EQUITY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN MONTENEGRO Current progress and opportunities for cross sectoral action on social determinants to improve equity in health GOVERNING FOR HEALTH EQUITY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN MONTENEGRO Current progress and opportunities for cross sectoral action on social determinants to improve equity in health Keywords: HEALTH EQUITY HEALTH STATUS DISPARITIES SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH HEALTH POLICY HEALTH PROMOTION MONTENEGRO Address requests about publications of the WHO Regional Office for Europe to: Publications WHO Regional Office for Europe UN City, Marmorvej 51 DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark Alternatively, complete an online request form for documentation, health information, or for permission to quote or translate, on the Regional Office website (http://www.euro.who.int/pubrequest). © World Health Organization 2017 All rights reserved. The Regional Office for Europe of the World Health Organization welcomes requests for permission to reproduce or translate its publications, in part or in full. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters.
    [Show full text]