BUSINESS AND HUMAN RIGHTS / Šturma, Mozetic (eds)

the moral but also from the legal perspective. 42 Furthermore, in a legalised market for organs, there is a threat of practices that exploit the most vulnerable, e.g. an organ mortgage. 43 It also has to be noted that the human tissue market could arguably undermine some of the society’s basic values 44 (such as the respect for the life of all persons). 45 Conclusion The universal consensus on the impermissibility of the commercialization of the human body is reflected in both the international law and Czech national law, which prohibit the sale of human body parts. However, there are practices that create a legal de facto market for human tissue with regulated prices in the Czech Republic. Some of these practices circumvent the purpose of the law and some are on the very edge of illegality. Very controversial is the handling of human body parts by the National Cell and Tissue Centre. Factual human body parts sales also occur in the so-called donation of blood plasma and gametes. From the theoretical perspective, the possibility of the sale of human organs is connected with the concept of self-ownership. While contemporary legal systems consider the human body and most of its parts res extra commercium (so they cannot possibly be owned), the proponents of self-ownership consider the current legal approach paternalistic and restricting both the numbers of organs available for transplantation and the poor persons’ chances to improve their financial situation. On the other hand, the sale of human organs would be highly problematic from the perspective of contemporary understanding of human rights. It would furthermore bring about the threat of exploitation of the poor whose consent would arguably not be free. The practice of organ sales might also alter some of the society’s important values regarding individual integrity and the value of life. De lege ferenda approach to self-ownership of the human body, therefore, depends on the balance of personal autonomy (and the recognition of its possible limitations represented by a poor financial situation) on one hand and the protection of human dignity and other traditional social values related to the human body on the other.

42 See HERRING, J.: Medical Law and Ethics. 5 th edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014, pp. 457-458. 43 KOPLIN, J.: Choice, pressure and markets in kidneys, Journal of Medical Ethics, 4 November 2017. http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2017/11/04/medethics-2017-104192, accessed 12 December 2017. See also HERRING, J.: Medical Law and Ethics. 5 th edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014, pp. 458-459. 44 See for example HERRING, J.: Medical Law and Ethics. 5 th edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014, p. 459. 45 For another introduction to the ongoing debate, see for example BRAZIER, M., CAVE, E.: Medicine, Patients and the Law. 6 th edition. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2016, pp. 538-540.

208