58. Article 26 of the American Convention recognizes economic, social, cultural and environmental rights. It is a framework article that integrates different rights and remits to the Charter of the Organization of American States (hereinafter “the OAS Charter”). The Court recalls that “the inclusion of the right to health in the OAS Charter […] is derived from Articles 34(i), 34(l)44 and 45(h)45 [and] in different precedents, the Court has recognized the right to health as a right protected by Article 26 of the Convention.”46 This right has been consolidated by a broad regional consensus since it has been explicitly recognized in various constitutions and domestic laws in the region.47 59. The Court has also held that the rights to life and to personal integrity are directly and immediately linked to health care48 and that the lack of adequate medical care may result in the violation of Articles 4(1)49 and 5(1)50 of the Convention. 60. The Court reiterates that “health is a fundamental human right essential for the satisfactory exercise of the other rights and everyone has the right to enjoy the highest attainable standard of health that allows them to live with dignity, understanding health not only as the absence of disease and infirmity, but also as a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, derived from a lifestyle that allows the individual to achieve total balance.”51 abortion often leads to maternal mortality and morbidity, which in turn constitutes a violation of the right to life or security, and in certain circumstances can amount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.” Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. General Comment No. 22 (2016), para. 10. Article 34(l) of the OAS Charter establishes that “[t]he Member States agree that equality of opportunity, the elimination of extreme poverty, equitable distribution of wealth and income and the full participation of their peoples in decisions relating to their own development are, among others, basic objectives of integral development. To achieve them, they likewise agree to devote their utmost efforts to accomplishing the following basic goals: […] i) Protection of man's potential through the extension and application of modern medical science; […] l) Urban conditions that offer the opportunity for a healthful, productive, and full life.” 44 Article 45(h) of the OAS Charter establishes that “[t]he Member States, convinced that man can only achieve the full realization of his aspirations within a just social order, along with economic development and true peace, agree to dedicate every effort to the application of the following principles and mechanisms: […] h) Development of an official social security policy.” 45 46 Cf. Case of Poblete Vilches et al. v. Chile. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of March 8, 2018. Series C No. 349, paras. 106 and 110 and Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 2, 2021. Series C No. 441, para. 182. 47 Among them are: Argentina, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela. See, the constitutional norms of Argentina (Art. 10); Barbados (Art. 17(2)(A); Bolivia (Art. 35); Brazil (Art. 196); Chile (Art. 19) Colombia (Art. 49); Costa Rica (Art. 46); Dominican Republic (Art 61); Ecuador (Art. 32); El Salvador (Art. 65); Guatemala (Arts. 93 and 94); Haiti (Art. 19); Mexico (Art. 4); Nicaragua (Art. 59); Panama (Art. 109); Paraguay (Art. 68); Peru (Art. 70); Suriname (Art. 36); Uruguay (Art. 44) and Venezuela (Art. 83). Cf. Constitutional Chamber, Supreme Court of Justice of Costa Rica, Resolution No. 13505 – 2006, of September 12, 2006, Considering paragraph III; Constitutional Court of Colombia, Judgments T-859 of 2003 and C-313 of 2014; Supreme Court of Justice of Mexico, Thesis of jurisprudence 8/2019 (10ª). Right of the Protection of Health. Individual and social dimension and Constitutional Court of Ecuador, Judgment No. 0012-09-SIS-CC, October 8. 2009. 48 Cf. Case of Albán Cornejo et al. v. Ecuador. Merits Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 22, 2007. Series C No. 171, para. 117 and Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador, supra, para. 183. Cf. Case of Gonzales Lluyet al. v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 1, 2015. Series C No. 298, para. 171 and Case of Chinchilla Sandoval et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 29, 2016. Series C No. 312, paras. 170, 200 and 225. 49 Cf. Case of Tibi v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 7, 2004. Series C No. 114 and Case of Hernández v. Argentina. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 22, 2019. Series C No. 395. 50 51 Cf. Case of Poblete Vilches et al. v. Chile, supra, para. 118 and Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador, supra, para. 184. 16