The judge noted that within the framework of the treaty establishing the EAEU, social security and the right to medical services are considered as separate categories. The right of workers and their families to receive medical assistance is stipulated in a special provision – paragraph 4 of Article 98 of the treaty, as well as in the protocol on medical assistance (Appendix No. 30).
As indicated by the court, it is these specific provisions that determine how the provision of medical services will be organized, including their scope and conditions. They do not imply the automatic application of CHI mechanisms to the family members of workers unless this is provided for by national legislation or international agreements in force in the member state.
In a separate opinion, the judge stated that this approach is due to the differences in social security and health insurance systems in EAEU states. For example, Russia uses a budget-insurance model, while other countries may employ mixed models or even lack any insurance models. Each jurisdiction retains the right to regulate these mechanisms independently.
At the same time, emergency medical care is provided to all family members of labor migrants within the territory of EAEU countries.
According to the judge's conclusion, CHI funds may be taken into account when reimbursing expenses for medical care for the insured, but this does not imply the automatic provision of policies.
On January 27, the Kyrgyz Republic appealed to the EAEU court for clarification of the treaty provisions, claiming that Russia is not fulfilling the agreement concerning labor migrants. The statement asserted that the current agreement between EAEU states guarantees family members of labor migrants access to CHI policies.
