The question of how digital health is regulated has become increasingly important within debates on technology, inequality and global health. While digital health is frequently celebrated for its capacity to expand access, build resilient systems and advance equity, scholars have raised critical concerns about its role in reproducing asymmetries of power. The potential for reproducing rather than curbing inequality is particularly relevant for the Global South. This Special Issue of the International Journal of Law in Context interrogates the ways in which digital health infrastructures, regulatory frameworks and transnational data flows are constitutive of coloniality and neoliberal capitalism. Bringing together socio-legal, feminist and decolonial perspectives, the contributions examine regulation as a terrain in which vulnerabilities, exclusions and structural inequalities are reinforced. Against the celebratory rhetoric of innovation, this collection situates regulation as a key site for understanding the entanglement of digital health with broader histories of coloniality and capitalism.

The promise of digitalisation in achieving Universal Health Coverage in postcolonial contexts is undermined by the realities of insufficiently resourced public healthcare systems. In response, private health insurance is often seen as essential to healthcare delivery. The provision of this private health insurance is increasingly mediated through digital infrastructures, with providers leaning into the promise of data-driven behavioural economics to provide better and more efficient services. While an increasing number of studies focus on digital health, in this paper, we particularly focus on the less-explored question of how datafication – under the veil of shared value, and enabled by forms of legal access – reproduces inequalities. Using the case study of Discovery, a financial services company in South Africa providing health insurance, we analyse how a social value and data-driven behavioural economic model of health insurance commodifies health and wellness. We argue that legal infrastructures are central to this commodification. Through a socio-legal critique of digital health, our article makes an original contribution to broader debates on enduring postcolonial social inequalities by illustrating how infrastructural injustice manifest through datafication.

Digital health services in Kenya comprise mobile health applications (mHealth apps), electronic health records, telehealth and telemedicine, which form part of an expanding digital health assemblage. These are shaped by transnational development agendas and donor-driven public health interventions. This paper discusses the for-profit turn in the digitalisation of health care – what I term the ‘appisation’ of health – as a site of intensified commodification where users are reconfigured as digitised health consumers. While other scholars have argued that digitalisation functions as extractive in deepening market penetration into spheres of life we rely on, I extend these arguments by claiming that, far from enhancing access, these technologies exploit vulnerabilities through opaque governance mechanisms and algorithmic decision-making, while transferring responsibility for health from the state to the individual, thus creating new dependencies on market-mediated platforms. Using discursive interface analysis of two health apps in Kenya, I examine how consumer health apps embed vulnerabilities while consumer law remains structurally limited in confronting the collective harms they generate.

Against a backdrop of rapidly expanding health artificial intelligence (AI) development, this paper examines how the European Union’s (EU) stringent digital regulations may incentivise the outsourcing of personal health data collection to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), fuelling a new form of AI ethics dumping. Drawing on parallels with the historical offshoring of clinical trials, we argue that current EU instruments, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) and Medical Devices Regulation, impose robust internal safeguards but do not prevent the use of health data collected unethically beyond EU borders. This regulatory gap enables data colonialism, whereby commercial actors exploit weaker legal environments abroad without equitable benefit-sharing. Building on earlier EU responses to ethics dumping in clinical trials, we propose legal and policy pathways to prevent similar harms in the context of AI.

The introduction and use of digital contact tracing apps as part of pandemic management have notably raised many legal and ethical challenges, ranging from determinations of public interest in using gathered data to privacy protections for app users and broader considerations of national socio-economic priorities. As the use of these digital contact tracing apps is supported by laws, legal preparedness is essential in determining appropriate legal authority that considers necessary trade-offs such as temporary privacy infringements, proportional data gathering and collective public health benefits. This paper examines the extent of legal preparedness in addressing competing interests between public health and individuals in the use of digital contact tracing apps. It does so through two main lenses: (1) an analysis of Singapore’s legal framework pertaining to data protection, privacy and contact tracing apps and (2) an analysis of the domestic social and political influences that explain why Singapore’s approach to digital contact tracing was viable, and assess its potential or limits for broader applicability.

The digital age, while promising tools to advance health care, has simultaneously ushered in new forms of power asymmetry, with extractive data practices risking the perpetuation of historical injustices and structural inequities. Achieving epistemic justice in health data governance initiatives demands a fundamental shift in how knowledge is produced, legitimised and applied. It requires a concerted effort to delink from colonial epistemic hierarchies and to embrace the rich plurality of ways of knowing, ensuring that health data genuinely serves the well-being and prioritises the self-determination of those from all walks of life. This article critically examines Transform Health’s equity- and human rights-based ‘Health Data Governance Principles’ through a decolonial lens, interrogating their potential to foster equity in the rapidly expanding field of digital health. Grounded in a decolonial imperative, the article challenges dominant epistemologies that underpin current global health frameworks. The conceptual foundations and practical applications of the Health Data Governance Principles are then explored in light of the findings of an empirical study undertaken by the author which examined the Principles themselves, organisational perceptions thereof, and efforts towards their operationalisation. In particular, it interrogates whether these principles align with and address the needs and values of historically marginalised communities. Central to this analysis is the introduction of a decolonial nexus that brings into relation the decolonial concepts of ‘health data justice’, ‘epistemological delinking’ and the ‘vernacularisation of human rights’. This approach is intended to not only to expose epistemic injustice within prevailing health data governance models but also to centre emancipatory praxis in reclaiming knowledge, rights and representation in digital health agendas.

This article compares paid parental leave policies across nineteen Latin American jurisdictions, examining their effectiveness in promoting equality in caregiving. Despite notable expansions in social protection, and constitutional recognition of shared parental responsibilities in countries like Ecuador and Mexico, the region has not kept pace with global trends towards equitable leave entitlements. While most countries offer paid maternity leave, paternity leave remains minimal or symbolic, with two nations – Cuba and Honduras – offering none. A persistent gender imbalance remains in leave allocation, where fathers’ entitlements are often secondary or tokenistic. Drawing on a new dataset as of January 2025, the article evaluates how current policies support or hinder the equal sharing of childcare responsibilities while emphasising the importance of legal reform to drive social change. By centring fatherhood in policy discourse, the article calls for more inclusive and equitable reforms to ensure that all parents can participate meaningfully in childcare.

As global crises like inequality, climate change and financial instability intensify, ‘resilience’ has emerged as a central concept in international governance and law. The appeal lies in what scholars call the ‘resilience dividend’ – the promise that systems can recover and adapt when facing external shocks. This article critically examines how resilience has been adopted in international and transnational law, with a particular focus on transnational financial regulation. The article analyses the Bank for International Settlements (BIS)’ work on the resilience of central counterparties, which represents the most extended elaboration on resilience in transnational financial regulation. Rather than accepting resilience as an unqualified good, a more cautious approach is suggested. Resilience risks perpetuating existing injustices and reinforcing neoliberal structures by emphasising survival and adaptation over addressing the root causes of crises. Accordingly, resilience needs to be seen as an ambivalent concept that only through its specification one can determine its possible impact.

Sexual slavery has been an ongoing human rights issue within South Korea since World War II, yet discourse has almost exclusively centred on World War II sex slaves. Redress efforts typically focus on these survivors, their bodies symbolising the Korean nation, with post-World War II Korean sex slaves generally seen as ‘willing’ prostitutes. Nevertheless, the bodies, experiences and victimhood of all survivors remain contested. This paper discusses the connection between the ‘ideal’ victims, the World War II Korean sex slaves, and an example of ‘non-ideal’ victims, the gijichon women of the 1970s. Drawing upon recent judgments, Korean law and society, it analyses the impact of an ‘ideal’ victim construct upon survivors’ pursuit of redress in the Korean courts. In this paper I argue that, despite some success within domestic courts, the ‘ideal’ victim construct can explain why all survivors remain marginalised and have yet to receive full truth and justice.

This short note is not a book review but a set of reflections intended to indicate the potential benefits to jurists of an encounter with Professor Rhodri Lewis’s book Shakespeare’s Tragic Art. Shakespeare’s genius, as Lewis finds it performed in the tragedies, is that he does not try to make sense of life but dramatises our common struggle to make sense of life. These reflections will hopefully demonstrate that legal trials perform in a comparable way – not trying to cure that which is past remedy but giving the parties a forum in which to perform life’s agonies in agonistic mode.