Russia broadens rules for declaring foreign nationals with HIV undesirable

Russia has expanded the grounds for declaring the stay of foreign nationals with dangerous infectious diseases, including HIV, undesirable. The new rules took effect on October 13, 2026, TASS reports, citing State Duma (Russia’s lower chamber of parliament) member Igor Antropenko.

Previously, authorities could declare a foreign national’s stay in Russia undesirable based on a medical report issued following a special examination.

“Now, grounds for such a decision may also include notification that the disease was detected during a medical examination or when medical assistance was provided,” Antropenko said.

The changes were introduced by a Russian government decree dated October 13, 2026.

How will decisions be made?

After receiving information about a foreign national’s diagnosis, Russia’s consumer protection and public health watchdog, Rospotrebnadzor, must decide within 10 working days whether the person’s stay in the country should be declared undesirable. If additional information is needed, the review period may be extended to 60 calendar days.

The individual will be notified of the decision in person or by mail and must leave Russia. Failure to do so may result in deportation.

If the decision concerns a minor, it also applies to their legal representative residing in Russia.

The decision may be revoked if the foreign national submits medical documents confirming recovery.

The rules provide for several exceptions. They include contract military personnel and former contract servicemen who participated in combat operations as part of the Russian armed forces. Certain foreign nationals living with HIV are also exempt if they have close relatives permanently residing in Russia.

What changed for migrants on September 1?

The new rules follow a broader tightening of medical screening requirements for foreign nationals.

From September 1, 2026, Russia shortened the deadline for migrants to undergo mandatory medical examinations from 90 days to 30 days after arrival.

Foreign nationals staying in Russia for more than 30 days must undergo annual screening for dangerous infectious diseases, HIV and drug use. Migrants or their employers must cover the cost of the examinations.

Medical checks may be conducted only by authorized medical organizations, without intermediaries.

Medical examinations are also required when applying for a temporary residence permit or a work permit, as well as when renewing a labor patent.

Russia: Foreign nationals in Novosibirsk screened for HIV and toxic substances

Foreign nationals arriving in Novosibirsk to study or work are required to undergo a medical examination, for which they must pay. The examination covers 13 different areas.

Health checks on foreign nationals in Novosibirsk have been tightened, according to the Novosibirsk Region Ministry of Health. Under current regulations, all migrants arriving in the city to take up employment or pursue education must undergo a comprehensive medical examination. This procedure is carried out by the Novosibirsk Regional Clinical Infectious Diseases Hospital and the Regional Clinical Narcological Dispensary. For the convenience of citizens, their branches are located at 1G Yesenina Street, in the same building as the branch of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs’ Passport and Visa Centre.

The regional Ministry of Health explained that the cost of services is determined on the basis of economically justified costs for material and labour resources, in response to complaints from migrants about high prices.

As part of the medical examination, blood samples are taken from all foreign nationals aged 13 and over for chemical and toxicological analysis. The analysis is designed to detect the presence of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and new, potentially dangerous psychoactive compounds.

In addition, tests are carried out to detect infectious diseases that pose a risk to others. The list includes tests for HIV, syphilis, tuberculosis and leprosy (Hansen’s disease). Thus, every foreign national undergoes a total of 13 different types of tests. This measure is designed to ensure the region’s public health and epidemiological well-being and to monitor the health of the incoming population.

Мигрантов в Новосибирске проверяют на ВИЧ и токсические вещества

Прибывающие в Новосибирск для учебы или работы иностранные граждане обязаны пройти платное медицинское обследование. Освидетельствование проводится по 13 различным направлениям.

В Новосибирске ужесточен контроль за состоянием здоровья иностранных граждан, проинформировали в Министерстве здравоохранения Новосибирской области. Согласно действующим правилам, все мигранты, прибывающие в город с целью трудоустройства или получения образования, должны пройти комплексное медицинское освидетельствование. Данную процедуру осуществляют Новосибирская областная клиническая инфекционная больница и областной клинический наркологический диспансер. Для удобства граждан их филиалы открыты по адресу: улица Есенина, 1Г, в одном здании с филиалом паспортно-визового центра МВД России.

В Минздраве региона пояснили, что стоимость услуг формируется на основе расчета экономически обоснованных затрат на материальные и трудовые ресурсы, отвечая на жалобы мигрантов о высоких ценах.

В рамках медицинского осмотра у всех иностранных граждан, достигших 13 лет, берут кровь на химико-токсикологическое исследование. Анализ направлен на выявление наличия наркотических средств, психотропных веществ и новых потенциально опасных психоактивных соединений.

Кроме того, проводится проверка на наличие инфекционных заболеваний, представляющих опасность для окружающих. В перечень входят тесты на ВИЧ, сифилис, туберкулез и лепру (болезнь Гансена). Таким образом, каждый иностранец проходит в общей сложности 13 различных видов исследований. Данная мера направлена на обеспечение санитарно-эпидемиологического благополучия региона и контроль за состоянием здоровья прибывающего населения.

France: Fear of deportation is keeping people living with HIV away from healthcare in Mayotte

Whilst the number of HIV cases in Mayotte has been rising in recent years, several doctors have highlighted barriers to testing and access to care. Among these is the fear of deportation for undocumented migrants.

The HIV epidemic is spreading rapidly in Mayotte, but screening and access to care are being hampered by the fear of police checks amongst undocumented migrants, warn doctors and charities. According to the Epimay 2025 study by the Regional Health Agency (ARS),five in every 1,000 adults are living with the virus, compared with one in 1,000 in 2019.
Our territory has the “highest positivity rate of all French departments”, as highlighted by Santé publique France in a report published in 2025. Dr Mohamadou Niang, head of the infectious diseases department at the Mayotte Hospital Centre (CHM) in Mamoudzou, has observed this acceleration. Until 2021, he recorded “between 20 and 30” new positive cases per year. “In 2025, the figure stood at 139,” he warns, with around a hundred new cases already recorded by the end of August 2026.

The infectious diseases specialist identifies numerous obstacles to screening, explaining that 20 per cent of patients only discover their condition at a very late stage. In addition to the cost of transport in a department where 77 per cent of the population lives below the poverty line, fear of the police deters those who are ill. Nearly 48 per cent of residents are foreign nationals, according to the 2017 INSEE census.

Workarounds

Dr Alain Prual, head of the Free Centre for Information, Screening and Diagnosis (CeGIDD) in Mamoudzou, shares this view. “The main obstacle is the PAF”, the border police, he asserts, referring to screening checks on the outskirts of the hospital. Dr Abdon Goudjo, Director of Maternal and Child Protection (PMI), observes for his part that his patients devise “strategies” to “get round the police” and manage to see a doctor.

In June 2024, the Defender of Rights confirmed the existence of “police checks in the vicinity of the Mayotte hospital, which are likely to hinder access to healthcare for undocumented migrants”. This group is the most affected. In 2024, 65 per cent of new HIV diagnoses in Mayotte were among nationals of Madagascar and the Comoros, and 22 per cent from sub-Saharan Africa, in a “regional context marked by a resurgence” of cases.

Withholding of care

To overcome these obstacles, testing is being decentralised. The CeGIDD has opened branches in Longoni, Iloni and Petite-Terre. Mobile units are also travelling across the island. In Dembéni, Israël Mundi, the health mediator for the Nariké M’sada association, offers rapid tests from a van, with results available “in a matter of minutes”. This mobile approach allows them “to get as close as possible to the population”, emphasises his colleague, prevention officer Ahmed Hassani.

If the test is positive, patients are referred to the CHM. In Dr Niang’s department, “more than half” of the 600 patients being treated are undocumented migrants. Without health insurance, until recently they had to visit the hospital every month to collect their antiretroviral treatments. Frightened, some patients turn back. Others are “often” stopped near the hospital and then placed in an administrative detention centre pending their deportation, laments the infectious diseases specialist, as residence permits for medical treatment remain “difficult” to obtain.

The virus is more detectable in the blood in Mayotte than in mainland France

These interruptions in treatment explain why the virus is undetectable in the blood in only 80 per cent of patients being treated in Mayotte, compared with over 95 per cent in mainland France. When taken without interruption, antiretrovirals prevent the virus from multiplying to the point where it becomes undetectable: the person can then no longer transmit it sexually. To limit risky travel, the doctor explained to AFP that treatments are now being dispensed for three months at a time.

Furthermore, an operational committee set up in April 2026 by the prefecture and the Regional Health Agency (ARS) plans to secure testing centres with the help of the police. When contacted by AFP, these institutions did not respond. In this context, prevention is paramount. During a campaign on the north-east coast in Bandraboua at the end of September, Raissa Ali Baco, a sexual health officer at the Red Cross, distributed free condoms. She points out that this is the “only means of protection against all STIs”, sexually transmitted infections.

“Le principal obstacle, c’est la PAF”, la peur des expulsions éloigne les malades du VIH des soins à Mayotte

Alors que le nombre de cas de VIH à Mayotte se multiplient ces dernières années, plusieurs médecins pointent des freins au dépistage et à l’accès aux soins. Parmi eux, la peur des expulsions pour les étrangers en situation irrégulière.

L’épidémie de VIH progresse fortement à Mayotte, mais le dépistage et l’accès aux soins se heurtent à la peur des contrôles de police chez les étrangers en situation irrégulière, alertent médecins et associations. Selon l’étude Epimay 2025 de l’Agence régionale de santé (ARS), cinq adultes sur 1.000 vivent avec le virus, contre un sur 1.000 en 2019.
Notre territoire affiche le “taux de positivité le plus élevé parmi l’ensemble des départements français“, soulignait Santé publique France dans un bilan publié en 2025. Chef du service des maladies infectieuses au Centre hospitalier de Mayotte (CHM) à Mamoudzou, le docteur Mohamadou Niang constate cette accélération. Jusqu’en 2021, il recensait “entre 20 et 30” nouveaux cas positifs par an. “En 2025, on est à 139“, s’alarme-t-il, avec déjà une centaine de nouveaux cas à la fin du mois d’août 2026.

L’infectiologue identifie de nombreux obstacles au dépistage, expliquant que 20% des patients découvrent leur maladie à un stade très tardif. Outre le coût des transports dans un département où 77% de la population vit sous le seuil de pauvreté, la peur des forces de l’ordre dissuade les malades. Près de 48% des habitants sont étrangers, selon le recensement de l’Insee en 2017.

Des stratégies de contournement

Responsable du Centre gratuit d’information, de dépistage et de diagnostic (CeGIDD) de Mamoudzou, le docteur Alain Prual partage ce constat. “Le principal obstacle, c’est la PAF“, la police aux frontières, assure-t-il, mentionnant des contrôles filtrants aux abords de l’hôpital. Directeur de la Protection maternelle et infantile (PMI), le docteur Abdon Goudjo observe de son côté que ses patientes élaborent des “stratégies” pour “contourner les forces de police” et parvenir à consulter un médecin.

En juin 2024, le Défenseur des droits a attesté l’existence de “contrôles de police aux abords du centre hospitalier de Mayotte, susceptibles d’entraver l’accès aux soins des étrangers en situation irrégulière“. Cette population est la plus touchée. En 2024, 65% des nouveaux diagnostics de VIH à Mayotte concernaient des ressortissants de Madagascar et des Comores, et 22% d’Afrique subsaharienne, dans un “contexte régional marqué par une recrudescence” des cas.

Renoncement aux soins

Pour contourner ces freins, le dépistage se décentralise. Le CeGIDD a ouvert des antennes à Longoni, Iloni et en Petite-Terre. Des unités mobiles sillonnent également l’île. À Dembéni, le médiateur en santé de l’association Nariké M’sada, Israël Mundi, propose dans un camion des tests rapides offrant un résultat “en quelques minutes“. Cette itinérance permet “d’aller au plus proche de la population“, souligne son collègue agent de prévention Ahmed Hassani.

Si le test est positif, les patients sont orientés vers le CHM. Dans le service du docteur Niang, “plus de la moitié” des 600 patients suivis sont des étrangers sans-papiers. Sans couverture sociale, ils devaient jusqu’à récemment se rendre mensuellement à l’hôpital pour récupérer leurs traitements antirétroviraux. Effrayés, des patients font demi-tour. D’autres sont “souvent” interpellés près de l’hôpital, puis placés en centre de rétention administrative en vue de leur expulsion, déplore l’infectiologue, les titres de séjour pour soins restant “difficiles” à obtenir.

Un virus plus détectable dans le sang à Mayotte que dans l’Hexagone

Ces interruptions de traitement expliquent que le virus ne soit indétectable dans le sang que chez 80% des patients suivis à Mayotte, contre plus de 95% dans l’Hexagone. Pris sans interruption, les antirétroviraux empêchent le virus de se multiplier jusqu’à le rendre indétectable : la personne ne le transmet alors plus par voie sexuelle. Pour limiter les déplacements risqués, le médecin explique à l’AFP délivrer désormais les traitements pour trois mois.

Par ailleurs, un comité opérationnel créé en avril 2026 par la préfecture et l’ARS prévoit de sanctuariser les lieux de dépistage avec les forces de l’ordre. Contactées par l’AFP, ces institutions n’ont pas répondu. Dans ce contexte, la prévention prime. Lors d’une action sur la côte nord-est à Bandraboua fin septembre, Raissa Ali Baco, chargée en santé sexuelle à la Croix-Rouge, a distribué des préservatifs gratuits. Il s’agit du “seul moyen qui protège contre toutes les IST“, les infections sexuellement transmissibles, rappelle-t-elle.

New Zealand: Government expands access to HIV prevention tools to all, regardless of visa status

Burnett Foundation Aotearoa welcomes the decision to expand access to HIV prevention tools

The Government’s decision to expand access to HIV prevention tools to all people in New Zealand, regardless of their visa status, is a great step forward for common-sense and evidence-based HIV prevention.

The change, enabled by The Healthy Futures (Pae Ora) (Eligibility) Regulations 2026, will come into effect on 1 December, quite appropriately, on World AIDS Day.

Under the new rules, publicly funded HIV prevention medicines will be available to anyone in New Zealand who meets the same clinical criteria already used for funded pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). This means eligibility will be based on a person’s risk of exposure to HIV, rather than their visa or immigration status.

In addition to providing access to the medicines themselves, the regulation change also provides for the associated lab testing required to prescribe and monitor treatment.

Burnett Foundation Aotearoa CEO Liz Gibbs says the change removes a longstanding and unnecessary barrier to HIV prevention. “As we learned with COVID-19, viruses do not check passports, visa categories or immigration status. If we are serious about ending HIV transmission in Aotearoa, everyone who could benefit from prevention tools should be able to access them.”

“PrEP is one of the most effective HIV prevention tools we have. Expanding access will help protect individuals, reduce new transmissions and strengthen New Zealand’s overall public health response.”

The Foundation has long advocated for the removal of eligibility barriers to HIV prevention services and welcomed the change as an important step towards New Zealand’s goal of zero locally acquired HIV transmissions by 2030.

Research and international experience show that making HIV prevention tools widely available is one of the most effective ways to reduce new infections. Ensuring that people can access PrEP based on risk rather than visa status will improve equity, reduce preventable HIV transmissions and help New Zealand maintain progress towards ending HIV transmission.

The change is particularly important given the mobile nature of communities across Aotearoa and the wider Pacific. Ensuring everyone at risk can access prevention services benefits both individuals and the broader community.

While welcoming the announcement, Burnett Foundation Aotearoa says further action is needed to ensure access to PrEP is practical and consistent.

“We’ve removed one important barrier, but there are still others,” says Gibbs.

“We also need funding to enable pharmacists to supply PrEP under appropriate clinical arrangements. This would make access faster and easier, particularly for people who may not have a regular GP, fear stigma in small communities, or who face long waits or long trips for appointments.”

Burnett Foundation Aotearoa will continue working with Health New Zealand, primary care providers and community stakeholders to ensure the benefits of the new regulations translate into real-world improvements in access to HIV prevention services.

“This shows what can be achieved when public health policy follows evidence,” says Gibbs.

“World AIDS Day is an appropriate day for these changes to take effect. It’s a reminder that ending HIV transmission is possible, but only if everyone who needs prevention, testing and treatment can access it.”

Greece found in violation of human rights over treatment of HIV-positive asylum seeker

European Court of Human Rights Condemns Greece for Violating Rights of HIV-Positive Asylum Seeker

European Court of Human Rights condemns Greece over delayed access to treatment and degrading and inhuman living conditions of HIV-positive asylum seeker in Moria camp.

The European Court of Human Rights has found that Greece violated the rights of an HIV-positive asylum seeker by failing to ensure timely access to essential antiretroviral treatment and by subjecting her to inhuman and degrading conditions in the Moria camp on Lesvos.

In its judgment concerning R.M. (application no. 48822/20), the Court found that Greece violated Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. R.M. was represented by HIAS Greece.

R.M., a woman from Cameroon born in 1986, contracted HIV as a result of rape. She arrived at Moria in December 2019 and informed the Greek authorities of her HIV-positive status. Although the authorities knew that antiretroviral treatment was unavailable on Lesvos, she was kept on the island under “geographical restriction”, a containment policy confining asylum seekers to the Aegean islands. Her HIV diagnosis was confirmed in March 2020 and she was referred to a specialized infections unit in Athens. Although the restriction was subsequently lifted, she did not begin antiretroviral treatment until July 2020 — more than four months after her diagnosis — because of significant and unjustified delays in processing her transfer to the mainland. During this period, her health deteriorated significantly.

The Court found that, given R.M.’s vulnerability and her dependent position as an asylum seeker within the reception system, the more than four-month delay in providing essential HIV treatment could not be regarded as a mere administrative inconvenience. The authorities had therefore failed to ensure timely access to the medical care she required, in violation of Article 3.

The Court also found that the conditions in Moria — overcrowding, lack of access to necessities, lack of heating, inadequate access to sanitary facilities, inappropriate and inadequate food, lack of access to medical care — amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of Article 3.

The ruling follows the Court’s 2023 judgment in E.F. v. Greece, concerning another Cameroonian HIV-positive asylum seeker who had contracted HIV as a result of rape. In that case, the Court found a violation of Article 3 following a six-month delay in access to antiretroviral treatment while the applicant was dependent on the Greek reception system.

The Court awarded R.M. €8,000 in non-pecuniary damage.

Reflecting on the judgment, R.M. said:
“The decision of the European Court of Human Rights fills me with joy and emotion. To me, it represents much more than a judicial decision: it is the recognition of the value and dignity of human life, as well as an essential affirmation of the protection of human rights. After all this ordeal, this decision represents immense recognition and deep relief. I sincerely thank all the people who contributed to ensuring that this truth was heard and to defending these fundamental rights. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.”

Russia: HIV status continues to restrict residence rights for foreign nationals

Translated with DEEPL – Scroll down for article in Russian

Foreign nationals living with HIV in Russia: rights, opportunities and restrictions

Russia remains a country with legal restrictions on foreign nationals living with HIV. A positive HIV status can serve as direct grounds for the deportation of a foreign national and as an obstacle to obtaining a temporary residence and work permit, a residence permit and citizenship. In this article, we will examine the current opportunities and restrictions for foreign nationals with HIV in the Russian Federation: obtaining the necessary documents, access to medical care, and the possibility of avoiding deportation by complying with the procedures laid down by law.

According to Federal Law No. 38-FZ of 30 March 1995 ‘On the Prevention of the Spread in the Russian Federation of the Disease Caused by the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV Infection)’, access to free diagnosis and treatment is guaranteed exclusively to citizens of the Russian Federation. Foreign nationals may only receive medical care on a fee-paying basis at healthcare organisations holding the relevant licence.

Medicines, including antiretrovirals, for personal use may be brought into the Russian Federation without special registration or authorisation. It is recommended that you carry a prescription with you.

Obtaining Russian citizenship and a residence permit whilst HIV-positive

According to Article 10 of Federal Law No. 38-FZ of 30 March 1995, diplomatic missions or consular offices of the Russian Federation shall issue Russian visas to foreign nationals and stateless persons arriving in the Russian Federation for a period exceeding three months only on condition that they present a certificate confirming they are free from HIV infection. A confirmed HIV infection is a direct obstacle to long-term residence in the Russian Federation.

In addition to HIV infection, the detection of tuberculosis, leprosy (Hansen’s disease) or COVID-19 may constitute grounds for refusing to grant a foreign national a residence permit, a patent or citizenship.

A person with HIV may obtain a temporary residence permit, a residence permit or Russian citizenship if they have close relatives who are citizens of the Russian Federation or who have another legal basis for permanent residence in the Russian Federation (spouses, children (including adopted children), parents (including adoptive parents)).

It is important to understand that when applying for a temporary residence permit, it is necessary to gather and submit, in advance, documents confirming the existence of a close relative who is a Russian citizen. If a migrant fails to provide the relevant information before a decision on undesirable residence is made, it becomes difficult to challenge that decision.

Deportation in the case of a positive HIV status

If a foreign national lawfully residing in Russia is found to be HIV-positive following an official test, the information is automatically forwarded to Rospotrebnadzor. The agency makes a decision regarding the undesirability of their stay in the Russian Federation. If the foreign national refuses to leave the country voluntarily, they face immediate deportation in accordance with Article 25.10 of Federal Law No. 114 ‘On the Procedure for Departure from and Entry into the Russian Federation’.

An important exception has been in force since 2016: a decision declaring the person’s presence undesirable is not made if the foreign national has family members — citizens or foreign nationals/stateless persons — who are permanently resident in Russia.

Foreign nationals living with HIV are rarely specifically targeted, but they do find themselves included on the list of persons prohibited from entering and staying in the Russian Federation. This can prevent them from returning to Russia after leaving the country and deprive them of the opportunity to regularise their status in the future.

In practice, many migrants living with HIV avoid official testing to prevent facing entry bans and deportation. As a result, they remain in the country illegally, losing access to formal employment, a stable life and high-quality medical care.

Under the Federal Law ‘On the Legal Status of Foreign Nationals in the Russian Federation’, a temporary residence permit (TRP) and a residence permit will not be issued to a foreign national unless they hold a certificate confirming they are free from HIV infection. Similarly, any previously issued documents will be revoked.

How to avoid deportation

If a decision declaring the foreign national’s stay undesirable has already been made, but the foreign national has grounds to challenge it, they must urgently lodge an appeal with the court. Where there is a compelling ground (such as relatives residing in Russia), the courts are obliged to take into account humanitarian circumstances: the person’s state of health, long-term treatment, employment prospects and social integration. It is recommended to book a consultation in advance with a lawyer specialising in migration and medical law.

Initiatives to revise the rules governing the stay of foreign nationals with HIV in Russia

Since Federal Law No. 38-FZ came into force in 1995, there have been repeated attempts to amend the legislation governing the status of foreign nationals and stateless persons living with HIV.

In February 2017, Deputy Prime Minister Olga Golodets instructed the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of the Interior and Rospotrebnadzor to consider the possibility of revising the rules on entry and residence for foreign nationals living with HIV. This instruction came against the backdrop of the removal from the draft ‘Strategy for Combating HIV’ of a clause concerning the possible lifting of restrictions (on the initiative of the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economic Development). Members of the Council on Social Welfare noted in public statements that the existing deportation rules were outdated, counterproductive (migrants conceal their status, die from complications of HIV infection or return to Russia illegally) and economically disadvantageous for the state. They proposed ensuring access to treatment, after which foreigners living with HIV would no longer pose a threat to the health of those around them.

In 2021, Fedot Tumusov, First Deputy Chair of the State Duma Committee on Health Protection, submitted a draft bill to the government providing for the abolition of mandatory deportation of foreign nationals and stateless persons living with HIV. In his view, HIV-positive migrants should be allowed to receive treatment legally in Russia (either at their own expense or at the expense of their country of origin). Tumusov emphasised that such a decision would protect people’s rights to medical care and result in significant savings for the state budget.

However, these initiatives did not lead to any substantial changes in the legislation, and strict regulations concerning migrants living with HIV remain in place in Russia.

From 1 September 2026, new rules on medical examinations for foreign nationals came into force. All foreign nationals arriving in Russia for a period exceeding 90 days are now required to undergo a medical examination within 30 days of entry. The examination will check for the absence of HIV infection, tuberculosis, syphilis, leprosy and signs of psychoactive substance use. If a dangerous disease or the use of prohibited substances is detected during the examination, the medical organisation is obliged to report this to the Ministry of the Interior and Rospotrebnadzor within 24 hours, which will result in immediate deportation. Failure to undergo the examination within the specified timeframe also carries administrative penalties, including expulsion from the country.

Conclusion

The situation of foreign nationals living with HIV in Russia remains complex and contradictory. On the one hand, if a person has relatives in Russia, a positive HIV status is no longer an absolute barrier to obtaining a residence permit, a temporary residence permit or citizenship. On the other hand, the existing regulations are often described as outdated, as they do not reflect recent developments brought about by advances in antiretroviral therapy. The full decriminalisation of the residence of HIV-positive foreign nationals in Russia could significantly improve the situation: it would help reduce the hidden prevalence of the disease and enhance the effectiveness of the healthcare system.

Иностранцы с ВИЧ в России: права, возможности и ограничения

Россия остается страной, имеющей законодательные ограничения для иностранцев с ВИЧ-инфекцией. Положительный ВИЧ-статус может служить прямым основанием для депортации иностранного гражданина и препятствием для получения разрешения на временное пребывание и работу, вида на жительство и гражданства. В статье рассмотрим актуальные возможности и ограничения для иностранных граждан с положительным ВИЧ-статусом в РФ: оформление документов, доступ к медицинской помощи, а также возможность избежать депортации при соблюдении установленных законом процедур.

Согласно Федеральному закону от 30 марта 1995 года № 38-ФЗ «О предупреждении распространения в Российской Федерации заболевания, вызываемого вирусом иммунодефицита человека (ВИЧ-инфекции)», доступ к бесплатной диагностике и лечению гарантируется исключительно гражданам Российской Федерации. Иностранцы могут получать медицинскую помощь только на платной основе в медицинских организациях, имеющих соответствующую лицензию.

Лекарственные препараты, в том числе антиретровирусные, для личного использования могут ввозиться на территорию Российской Федерации без специальной регистрации и разрешений. Рекомендуется иметь при себе рецепт.

Получение российского гражданства и вида на жительство при положительном ВИЧ-статусе

Согласно статье 10 Федерального закона от 30 марта 1995 года № 38-ФЗ, дипломатические представительства или консульские учреждения Российской Федерации выдают российскую визу иностранным гражданам и лицам без гражданства, прибывающим в Российскую Федерацию на срок свыше трех месяцев, только при условии предъявления ими сертификата об отсутствии у них ВИЧ-инфекции. Подтвержденная ВИЧ-инфекция является прямым препятствием для долгосрочного пребывания в РФ.

Помимо ВИЧ-инфекции, причиной для отказа в выдаче иностранцу вида на жительство, патента и гражданства может стать выявление туберкулеза, лепры (болезни Гансена), COVID-19.

Человек с ВИЧ может получить разрешение на временное проживание, вид на жительство и гражданство России, если у него есть близкие родственники с гражданством РФ или другим легальным основанием для постоянного проживания на территории РФ (супруги, дети (в том числе усыновленные), родители (в том числе приемные).

Важно понимать, что при подаче на разрешение на временное проживание необходимо заранее собрать и предоставить документы, подтверждающие наличие близкого родственника, являющегося гражданином РФ. Если мигрант не успевает предоставить соответствующие данные до вынесения решения о нежелательном пребывании, то оспорить его становится затруднительно.

Депортация при положительном ВИЧ-статусе

Если у иностранного гражданина, законно находящегося в России, при официальном тестировании выявляется ВИЧ-инфекция, информация автоматически передается в Роспотребнадзор. Ведомство принимает решение о нежелательности пребывания на территории РФ. При отказе добровольно покинуть страну иностранцу грозит немедленная депортация в соответствии со статьей 25.10 Федерального закона № 114 «О порядке выезда из Российской Федерации и въезда в Российскую Федерацию».

Важное исключение действует с 2016 года: решение о нежелательности пребывания не выносится, если у иностранца есть члены семьи — граждане или иностранные граждане/лица без гражданства, постоянно проживающие на территории России.

Целенаправленно иностранцев с ВИЧ редко разыскивают, однако они оказываются включенными в список лиц, которым запрещены въезд и пребывание в РФ. Это может стать препятствием для возвращения в Россию после выезда и лишить возможности легализоваться в будущем.

На практике многие мигранты с ВИЧ избегают официального тестирования, чтобы не столкнуться с запретами и депортацией. В результате они остаются в стране нелегально, теряют доступ к официальной работе, стабильной жизни и качественному лечению.

Согласно Федеральному закону «О правовом положении иностранных граждан в Российской Федерации», разрешение на временное проживание (РВП) и вид на жительство иностранному гражданину не выдаются, если он не имеет сертификата об отсутствии ВИЧ-инфекции. Аналогично аннулируются и ранее выданные документы.

Как избежать депортации

Если решение о нежелательности пребывания уже вынесено, но у иностранного гражданина есть основания, чтобы его оспорить, необходимо срочно обратиться в суд с жалобой. При наличии главного основания (родственников, проживающих в России) суды обязаны учитывать гуманные обстоятельства: состояние здоровья, продолжительный прием терапии, возможность трудоустройства и социальную интеграцию человека. Рекомендуется предварительно записаться на консультацию к адвокату по миграционному и медицинскому праву.

Инициативы по пересмотру правил пребывания иностранных граждан с ВИЧ в России

После вступления в силу Федерального закона № 38-ФЗ в 1995 году неоднократно предпринимались попытки изменить законодательство, регулирующее положение иностранных граждан и лиц без гражданства с ВИЧ-инфекцией.

В феврале 2017 года вице-премьер Ольга Голодец поручила Минздраву, МВД и Роспотребнадзору рассмотреть возможность пересмотра правил въезда и проживания иностранных граждан с ВИЧ. Поручение появилось на фоне удаления из проекта «Стратегия борьбы с ВИЧ» пункта о возможном снятии ограничений (по инициативе Минфина и Минэкономики). Члены Совета по вопросам попечительства в социальной сфере в публичных заявлениях отмечали, что существующие нормы о депортации устарели, приводят к обратному эффекту (мигранты скрывают статус, умирают от осложнений ВИЧ-инфекции или незаконно возвращаются в Россию) и экономически невыгодны для государства. Они предлагали обеспечить доступ к лечению, после которого иностранцы с ВИЧ перестанут представлять угрозу для здоровья окружающих.

В 2021 году первый заместитель председателя комитета Госдумы по охране здоровья Федот Тумусов направил в правительство законопроект, предусматривающий отмену обязательной депортации иностранных граждан и лиц без гражданства с ВИЧ. По его мнению, ВИЧ-положительным мигрантам необходимо разрешить легально лечиться в России (как за свой счет, так и за счет страны происхождения). Тумусов подчеркнул, что такое решение защитит права людей на медицинскую помощь и значительно сэкономит бюджет страны.

Однако эти инициативы к существенным изменениям в законодательстве не привели, и в России остались жесткие нормы, касающиеся мигрантов с ВИЧ.

С 1 сентября 2026 года вступили в силу новые правила медицинского освидетельствования иностранных граждан. Все иностранцы, прибывающие в Россию на срок более 90 дней, теперь обязаны пройти обследование в течение 30 дней с момента въезда. Проверку будут проводить на отсутствие ВИЧ-инфекции, туберкулеза, сифилиса, лепры и признаков употребления психоактивных веществ. Если в ходе процедуры обнаружат опасное заболевание или факт употребления запрещенных веществ, медицинская организация обязана в течение 24 часов сообщить об этом в МВД и Роспотребнадзор, что приведет к немедленной высылке. Нарушение сроков прохождения осмотра также влечет административную ответственность вплоть до выдворения из страны.

Заключение

Положение иностранцев с ВИЧ-инфекцией в России остается сложным и противоречивым. С одной стороны, при наличии родственников в России положительный ВИЧ-статус больше не является абсолютным препятствием для получения вида на жительство, патента или гражданства. С другой стороны, существующие правила часто называют устаревшими, поскольку в них не отражены современные изменения, произошедшие благодаря развитию антиретровирусной терапии. Полная декриминализация проживания ВИЧ-положительных иностранцев в России могла бы значительно улучшить ситуацию: она позволит снизить скрытую заболеваемость и повысит эффективность системы здравоохранения.

France: Right to residence for medical treatment: figures for HIV and viral hepatitis

Translated with Deepl.com – Scroll down for original article in French

Since 2017, the French Office for Immigration and Integration (OFII) has been responsible for granting permission to reside for medical treatment.

In its 8th report on medical assessment in the context of the right to residence on health grounds (2024 data), the OFII has published figures concerning people living with HIV and those with viral hepatitis B or C. What are these figures and what do they reveal?

Medical assessment entrusted to the Ministry of the Interior

The Act of 7 March 2016 significantly overhauled the system for granting residence permits for medical treatment. Until then, this had been the responsibility of the regional health agencies (ARS), whose medical inspectors assessed applications. The overseeing ministry was the Ministry of Health.

Under the 2016 Act, from January 2017 onwards – despite opposition from a significant section of civil society, particularly organisations defending the rights and health of foreign nationals – this assessment was entrusted to the French Office for Immigration and Integration (OFII), which falls under the Ministry of the Interior. Two different settings, two different approaches.

It is the responsibility of this body to issue an opinion on the applicant’s state of health and access to healthcare in their country of origin. From a regulatory perspective, the OFII issues a medical opinion on the foreign national’s application, taking into account two cumulative criteria: whether the person’s state of health requires medical care, the absence of which could have exceptionally serious consequences for them; and whether, given the availability of healthcare and the characteristics of the healthcare system in the person’s country of origin, they would be unable to effectively receive appropriate treatment there. In other words, is the person applying for a residence permit on health grounds at serious risk if they do not receive treatment? And if so, is the treatment they require available to them in their country of origin? If the answer to both questions is ‘yes’, the person will not be entitled to a residence permit on health grounds.

A complex and dissuasive procedure

‘In practice, once the admissibility of the application has been verified (civil status, nationality, domicile, habitual residence), a blank medical certificate is issued to the applicant, who has one month to submit it, together with any supporting documents they deem relevant, to the OFII’s medical service. On this basis, the OFII’s doctor draws up a detailed medical report which is forwarded to a panel of three doctors appointed by the OFII. If deemed necessary, the OFII’s doctor or the panel of doctors may request further information from the doctor who issued the medical certificate or drew up the medical report, request further examinations or summon the foreign national for an interview’, the Ministry of the Interior states in a response (published in the Official Journal on 16 June 2026) to a written question from a far-right MP addressed to the government in February of the same year. “Within three months of the foreign national submitting the medical certificate to the OFII, the Medical Board issues a detailed opinion on the basis of which the Prefect makes their decision. The Prefect may disregard a favourable opinion on grounds relating to public order and refuse to issue the residence permit,” the Ministry adds in its response, explaining: “This new procedural framework has resulted in a sharp fall in the number of applications submitted and in the number of first-time permits issued.”

What do the figures show?

Overall, the number of residence permits issued for medical treatment fell very sharply between 2016 and 2025: a 60 per cent drop in first-time issuances in 2025 compared with 2016. Indeed, for first-time applications, 7,118 residence permits for medical treatment were issued in 2016 (based on recommendations from the regional health agencies), compared with 3,063 in 2024 and 2,817 in 2025 (based on recommendations from the OFII for these last two years). In its response to the far-right MP, the Ministry of the Interior also emphasises that ‘the data for 2025 confirm this trend.’ The figures are falling.

Figures can also be found in the OFII’s 2024 Report on the procedure for granting residence permits for medical treatment; this is the eighth report of its kind submitted to Parliament, as required by law. This report covers data collected for the year 2024. The document was produced by the OFII’s medical service. It shows a “significant decrease” in applications, with the number falling from 24,858 in 2023 to 22,328 in 2024 – a drop of 10 per cent. Of the applications in 2024, 37.4 per cent were first-time applications (known as ‘primo-demandes’) from adults; 62.6 per cent were renewals. The approval rate rose very slightly, reaching 64.3 per cent compared with 63.1 per cent in 2023. It stood at 44.7 per cent for first-time applications from adults. Taking into account cases concluded in 2024, 80 per cent of applications ‘involve at least one diagnosis’ of infectious diseases (a figure down by 2.9 percentage points), diseases of the circulatory system, endocrine and metabolic diseases, and cancers. Since 2017, some 228,275 applications for residence permits for medical treatment have been submitted, with, as the OFII points out, a ‘gradual decline in the number of applications over recent years’. ”

In its 2024 report, the OFII states that 53.1 per cent of applications (first-time applications or renewals) are from men and 46.9 per cent from women. Over 90 per cent of applicants are adults. The countries with the highest number of applicants, in order, are: Algeria, Ivory Coast, the Comoros, the DRC, Cameroon and Georgia, etc. The OFII has also estimated the cost of medication. This is reported to be 119,742,000 euros; an average annual cost per patient of 6,643 euros.

Figures relating to people living with HIV

In 2024, 3,759 applications in which the medical file indicated an HIV/AIDS infection were finalised, representing 17.3 per cent of the total in 2024, compared with 19.4 per cent in 2023. Of these applications, 99.8 per cent concerned adults, 58.6 per cent of whom were women. The approval rate was 81.3 per cent. The average age of applicants was 45. Of the 21 main countries of origin, 20 were on the African continent (Côte d’Ivoire, Cameroon, DRC, Congo-Brazzaville, Guinea, Mali, Gabon, etc.), in the Caribbean region (Haiti) and on the South American continent (Suriname, Peru, Brazil); only one country was in Europe: Georgia. Looking at the nature of the applications: 86 per cent were renewals; 14 per cent were first-time applications. 59 per cent of the applications were submitted by women. For HIV, 81 per cent of the decisions issued were in favour of a residence permit for medical treatment. In its comments, the OFII emphasises that France “treats HIV-positive patients who did not have access to treatment in their country of origin”; and has been doing so since 1997, thanks to the residence permit scheme for medical treatment, but it is quick to point out that “[access to HIV treatment] has improved considerably since then.” In other words, the significant progress in low- and middle-income countries noted by UNAIDS itself would justify a more restrictive application of the right to residence for medical treatment in the context of HIV. This is not explicitly stated as such, but is largely implied by the analysis in the two pages of the report devoted to global progress. But does this analysis still hold water today, given the ongoing deterioration in access to care, prevention and treatment since Donald Trump’s return to office and the withdrawal of donor countries from the Global Fund?

Figures concerning people living with viral hepatitis

In 2024, 1,604 applications where the medical record indicated viral hepatitis were closed, representing 7.4 per cent of the total in 2024, compared with 7.9 per cent in 2023. Guinea, Côte d’Ivoire, Mali, Cameroon, Georgia, Senegal, the DRC, etc., were, in order, the countries with the highest number of applications. Renewals accounted for 67 per cent of applications, and 71 per cent of adult applicants were men. For HBV (1,388 cases), the approval rate was 59.2 per cent, compared with 55 per cent for HCV (156 cases). The average age of applicants living with hepatitis was 42.

When they are not seeking to do away with the AME, the far right and a significant section of the right are attacking residence permits for medical treatment. In his question to the Ministry of the Interior (February 2026), the far-right MP Michel Guimiot made no attempt at nuance, referring to ‘the granting of tens of thousands of residence permits for medical treatment’. ’ This is a caricature that is debunked by the OFII’s figures. The RN MP (Oise) also asks what the ‘cost’ of this is to the State ‘at a time when the country is facing a 25 billion euro deficit in its health insurance system. ’ Unlike the OFII, which puts forward a figure without citing its sources or explaining how its estimate was calculated, the Ministry of the Interior is more cautious in its response to the MP: ‘As regards the cost incurred by the provision of healthcare to sick foreign nationals, the Ministry of the Interior does not have any figures. In fact, holders of healthcare permits are covered by the universal health cover scheme (PUMA) just like anyone else residing in France on a stable and long-term basis. It is not currently possible to isolate their healthcare expenditure.”

Droit au séjour pour soins : les chiffres pour le VIH et les hépatites virales

Depuis 2017, l’admission au séjour pour soins est la prérogative de l’Office français de l’immigration et de l’intégration (Ofii).

Dans son 8ème rapport sur l’évaluation médicale dans le cadre du droit au séjour pour raison de santé (données 2024), l’Ofii publie des chiffres concernant les personnes vivant avec le VIH et celles avec une hépatite virale B ou C. Quels sont-ils et que disent-ils ?

Une évaluation médicale confiée au ministère de l’Intérieur

C’est la loi du 7 mars 2016 qui a largement remanié le dispositif d’admission au séjour pour soins. Celui-ci était jusqu’alors aux mains des agences régionales de santé (ARS), dont les médecins inspecteurs-rices examinaient les demandes. Le ministère de tutelle était celui de la Santé. Avec la loi de 2016, cette expertise est confiée, à partir de janvier 2017, malgré l’opposition d’une part importante de la société civile, notamment des associations de défense des droits et de la santé des personnes étrangères, à l’Office français de l’immigration et de l’intégration (Ofii), sous tutelle du ministère de l’Intérieur. Deux salles, deux ambiances.

À charge pour cette instance de rendre un avis sur l’état de santé de la personne demandeuse et l’accès à l’offre de soins dans le pays d’origine. D’un point de vue réglementaire, l’Ofii rend un avis médical sur la demande de la personne étrangère en prenant en compte deux critères cumulatifs : si l’état de santé de la personne nécessite une prise en charge médicale dont le défaut pourrait avoir pour elle des conséquences d’une exceptionnelle gravité et si, eu égard à l’offre de soins et aux caractéristiques du système de santé dans le pays dont la personne est originaire, elle ne pourrait pas y bénéficier effectivement d’un traitement approprié. Autrement dit, la personne qui fait la demande d’un titre de séjour pour raison de santé est-elle exposée à un risque majeur en absence de prise en charge ? Et si oui, les soins dont elle a besoin sont-ils disponibles pour elle dans son pays d’origine ? Si c’est oui aux deux questions, la personne ne pourra pas bénéficier du droit au séjour pour raison de santé.

Une procédure complexe et dissuasive

« Concrètement, après que la recevabilité de la demande a été vérifiée (état civil, nationalité, domicile, résidence habituelle), un certificat médical vierge est remis au demandeur qui dispose d’un délai d’un mois pour le transmettre, accompagné des pièces qu’il jugera utiles, au service médical de l’Ofii. Sur cette base, le médecin de l’office établit un rapport médical circonstancié qui est transmis à un collège de trois médecins désignés par l’Ofii. S’il le juge utile, le médecin de l’Ofii ou le collège de médecins peuvent demander des informations complémentaires au médecin ayant établi le certificat médical ou le rapport médical, solliciter des examens complémentaires ou convoquer l’étranger pour un entretien », rappelle le ministère de l’Intérieur dans une réponse (publiée au Journal officiel, le 16 juin 2026) à la question écrite d’un député d’extrême droite adressée au gouvernement en février de la même année. « Le collège de médecins établit, dans un délai de trois mois à compter de la transmission par l’étranger du certificat médical à l’Ofii, un avis circonstancié sur la base duquel le préfet prend sa décision. Le préfet peut s’écarter d’un avis favorable pour des motifs liés à l’ordre public et refuser la délivrance du titre de séjour », complète le ministère dans sa réponse, expliquant : « Ce nouveau cadre procédural a eu pour conséquence une forte baisse des demandes présentées ainsi que des premiers titres délivrés. »

Que disent les chiffres ?

Au global, les délivrances de titres de séjour pour soins ont diminué très fortement entre 2016 et 2025 : une baisse de 60 % en 2025 de primo délivrance par rapport à 2016. En effet, en première demande, 7 118 titres pour soins ont été délivrés en 2016 (avis émis par les agences régionales de santé), contre 3 063 en 2024 et 2 817 en 2025 (avis émis par l’Ofii pour ces deux dernières années). Dans sa réponse au parlementaire d’extrême droite, le ministère de l’Intérieur souligne d’ailleurs que « les données de 2025 confirment cette tendance. » Cela baisse.

Des chiffres, on en trouve également dans le Rapport 2024 de l’Ofii portant sur la procédure d’admission au séjour pour soins ; c’est le 8ème du genre rendu au Parlement, comme le prévoit la loi. Ce rapport porte sur les données recueillies sur l’année 2024. On doit le document au service médical de l’Ofii. Il établit une « diminution significative » des demandes puisque l’on passe de 24 858 demandes en 2023 à 22 328 en 2024, soit une baisse de 10 %. Sur les demandes de 2024, 37,4 % concernent des premières demandes (dites primo-demandes) de personnes adultes ; 62,6 % portent sur des renouvellements. Le taux d’avis favorables est en très légère hausse, il atteint 64,3 % contre 63,1 % en 2023. Il est de 44,7 % pour les premières demandes concernant des adultes. Lorsqu’on prend en compte les dossiers clôturés en 2024, 80 % des demandes « présentent au moins un diagnostic » de maladies infectieuses (un chiffre en baisse de 2,9 points), de maladies de l’appareil circulatoire, de maladies endocriniennes et métaboliques et de cancers. Depuis 2017, ce sont quelque 228 275 demandes de titres de séjour pour soins qui ont été déposées, avec, souligne l’Ofii, une « diminution progressive du nombre de demandes au cours de ces dernières années. »

Dans son rapport 2024, l’Ofii indique que 53,1 % des demandes (premières demandes ou renouvellements) concernent des hommes et 46,9 des femmes. Plus de 90 % des demandeurs-ses sont des adultes. Ce sont, dans l’ordre, pour les pays suivants que l’on compte le plus de demandeurs-es : Algérie, Côte d’Ivoire, Comores, RDC, Cameroun et Géorgie, etc. L’Ofii a aussi réalisé une estimation du coût des médicaments. Il s’agirait de 119 742 000 euros ; soit un coût moyen par patient-e de 6 643 euros annuels.

Les chiffres concernant les personnes vivant avec le VIH

En 2024, 3 759 demandes dont le dossier médical faisait était d’une infection à VIH/sida ont été clôturées, soit 17,3 % du total en 2024, contre 19,4 % en 2023. Sur ces demandes, 99,8 % concernaient des adultes, dont 58,6 % étaient des femmes. Le taux d’avis favorable était de 81,3 %. L’âge moyen des demandeurs-ses était de 45 ans. Sur 21 principales nationales concernées, 20 pays étaient sur le continent africain (Côte D’ivoire, Cameroun, RDC, Congo Brazzaville, Guinée, Mali, Gabon, etc.), dans la région Caraïbes (Haïti) et sur le continent sud-américain (Suriname, Pérou, Brésil) ; un seul pays était en Europe : la Géorgie. Si on regarde la nature des demandes : 86 % étaient des renouvellements ; 14 % étaient des premières demandes. Les demandes émanaient de femmes à 59 %. Pour le VIH, 81 % des avis rendus étaient favorables au titre de séjour pour soins. Dans ses commentaires, l’Ofii souligne que la France « soigne des patients séropositifs au VIH qui n’avaient pas accès aux traitements dans leur pays d’origine » ; et cela depuis 1997, grâce au dispositif de titres de séjour pour soins, mais c’est aussitôt pour rappeler que « [l’accès aux traitements VIH] s’est considérablement amélioré depuis. » Autrement dit, les avancées significatives dans les pays à revenu faible et modéré constatées par l’Onusida elle-même justifieraient une application plus restrictive du droit au séjour pour soins dans le cadre du VIH. Ce n’est pas explicitement écrit comme cela, mais largement sous-entendu par la démonstration dans les deux pages du rapport consacrées aux progrès mondiaux. Mais cette analyse tient-elle encore la route aujourd’hui avec la dégradation continue de l’accès aux soins, à la prévention et aux traitements depuis le retour de Donald Trump et le désengagement des pays donateurs vis-à-vis du Fonds mondial ?

Les chiffres concernant les personnes vivant avec une hépatite virale

En 2024, 1 604 demandes dont le dossier médical faisait était d’une hépatite virale ont été clôturées, soit 7,4 % du total en 2024, contre 7,9 % en 2023. La Guinée, la Côte d’Ivoire, le Mali, le Cameroun, la Géorgie, le Sénégal, la RDC, etc. arrivaient, par ordre, des pays pour lesquels il y avait le plus de demandes. Les renouvellements concernaient 67 % des demandes et 71 % des personnes adultes demandeuses étaient des hommes. Pour le VHB (1 388 dossiers), le taux d’avis favorables était de 59,2 %, contre 55 % pour le VHC (156 dossiers). L’âge moyen des demandeurs-ses vivant avec une hépatite était de 42 ans.

Quand il ne s’agit pas de tordre le cou à l’AME, l’extrême droite et une partie significative de la droite attaquent les titres de séjour pour soins. Dans sa question au ministère de l’Intérieur (février 2026), le député d’extrême droite Michel Guimiot ne fait pas dans la nuance évoquant « l’attribution de dizaines de milliers de titres de séjour pour soins. » Une caricature que démontent les chiffres de l’Ofii. Le député RN (Oise) demande d’ailleurs le montant de la « charge » que cela représente pour l’État « alors que le pays affronte un déficit de 25 milliards d’euros de son assurance santé. » Contrairement à l’Ofii qui avance un chiffre sans citer ses sources, ni les modalités de calcul de son estimation, le ministère de l’Intérieur se montre plus prudent dans sa réponse au député : « S’agissant du coût occasionné par les soins apportés aux étrangers malades, le ministère de l’intérieur ne dispose pas de chiffres. En effet, les bénéficiaires de titres pour soins bénéficient de la protection universelle maladie (PUMA) comme toute personne résidant en France de manière stable et durable. Isoler leurs dépenses de santé n’est pas réalisable pour le moment. »

Africa: Xenophobia and documentation barriers restrict migrant women’s access to healthcare

Africa: For Migrant Women, The Right to Healthcare Does Not Always Mean Access

Mombasa, Kenya — Over the past year, South Africa has witnessed several incidents in which migrants, asylum seekers and undocumented people have reportedly faced barriers to essential healthcare, including maternal and child health services.

For many migrant and refugee women, vulnerability does not end when they reach South Africa. But those who have been forced to leave their countries due to conflict, persecution or political instability may encounter new forms of exclusion and uncertainty when they arrive, reports Mail & Guardian.

In some communities, hostility towards foreigners can make accessing basic services even more difficult. Migrants may be asked to show their documentation when trying to access healthcare, education, employment and other essential services.

These barriers may be especially serious for women.

A pregnant woman might delay antenatal care because she is afraid of being asked for documents she cannot produce. A woman seeking contraception, HIV prevention or treatment, or support after gender-based violence might fear that seeking help could expose her immigration status.

Nowhere is this clearer than in maternal healthcare.

One woman from Malawi gave birth in an open space inside a deportation holding area, surrounded by strangers, with no medical professional present and no access to the care and testing needed to protect both mother and child.

South Africa has policies and laws that recognise the right to healthcare and protect human dignity. Yet for migrant women, the reality on the ground can look very different.

“It’s about their rights, it’s about protecting their human dignity,” said human rights activist Tsakani Mabasa, whose research examines how migrant women can better access sexual and reproductive health services in South Africa. Mabasa’s research exposes a troubling gap between what exists in policy and what happens when a migrant woman walks through the doors of a health facility.

Mabasa said her work with young people had increasingly led her to focus on protecting vulnerable groups, including migrant women living in South Africa. She said that access to SRHR services is fundamentally a human rights issue, particularly for women who are pregnant or experiencing gender-based violence.

“It’s not like you are doing a favour when a woman who is eight months pregnant walks into a facility and says, ‘I need support, I need Antenatal care (ANC) services,'” she said.

She also placed migration within a broader African context, arguing that movement across borders is a reality of the continent and that health systems need to account for people who cross borders rather than treating migration as a reason for exclusion. The question becomes particularly urgent for migrant women whose need for healthcare does not disappear because they lack documentation. Mabasa said the focus should instead remain on ensuring that women are treated with dignity and can access the services they need.

That vision, she said, is already written into South African law. She pointed to the Constitution as the starting point, alongside the National Health Act, the Refugees Act and a body of sexual and reproductive health policies that together protect access to care and human dignity. “Our constitution is very explicit in terms of how we need to provide services to the vulnerable population,” she said.

The Constitution guarantees access to healthcare services and states that no one may be refused emergency treatment. The National Health Act extends free care to all pregnant women, lactating mothers and children under six, a category that explicitly includes asylum seekers, undocumented migrants and stateless people, regardless of nationality. The Refugees Act adds another layer of protection.

Yet those protections have been tested repeatedly in practice. In December 2025, the Gauteng High Court ordered the authorities to allow unhindered access to the Yeoville and Rosettenville clinics in Johannesburg to people without South African identity documents. This came after vigilante groups had blocked them from entering. In 2025, a Malawian mother of a one-year-old child said Operation Dudula members prevented her from reaching Alexandra clinic before the child later died. Operation Dudula denied instructing anyone to block her. Gauteng Health MEC Nomantu Nkomo-Ralehoko called the blockades unlawful and demanded they stop. The Economic Freedom Fighters ( EFF) laid criminal charges against former Operation Dudula leader Zandile Dabula over the child’s death.

Operation Dudula argued that its actions respond to a health system under strain.

“In our operations we are saying, ‘Put South Africans first,'” one of its members, Tholakele Nkwanyana, told the Associated Press. She argued that the number of foreign nationals seeking care outstrips available medication and staff. Public health researchers dispute that framing. Collective Voices Against Health Xenophobia, a coalition of civil society groups and healthcare workers, has said migrants are being scapegoated for failures that have little to do with them. They argued that “migrants have been made scapegoats for a public health system in crisis” shaped by mismanagement and years of underinvestment.

However, the court recognised that even undocumented foreign nationals have a right to primary healthcare. The incidents show how legal protections can exist on paper while migrants continue to face barriers when they try to access healthcare.

“The law doesn’t say whether you’ve got documentation, you’ve got a passport,” Mabasa said. “These policies, as good as they are in black and white, don’t translate to equitable access.”

The court case did not end the problem. In March 2026, SECTION27, representing the Treatment Action Campaign, Médecins Sans Frontières and Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia, returned to court after monitoring found that vigilante groups were still present, particularly around Rosettenville clinic. The parties subsequently reached a settlement requiring state authorities to take steps to ensure safe and unhindered access to both clinics.

Mabasa said documentation should not determine whether a migrant woman is treated with dignity. “Those things are not relevant,” she said. “It’s about making sure that human dignity is respected.”

But legal protections do not necessarily translate into easy access to care.

Similar findings to those of Mabasa were found in research conducted in Ekurhuleni, where barriers reported by migrant women and health care workers included language, discrimination relating to migration status, and challenges in relation to documentation and referrals. The study also highlighted challenges faced by health care workers themselves when providing SRHR and HIV services to migrant women.

Mabasa also identified several barriers confronting migrant women.

Migrants whose permits or other documents have expired may find themselves unable or unwilling to seek care because of uncertainty over their status. “Some are sitting somewhere with expired documents, and that becomes a barrier,” she said.

The challenges facing migrant women do not exist in isolation.

Language can create another layer of exclusion, particularly when women struggle to communicate with healthcare workers or understand the services available to them. One woman told her plainly: “Sometimes I don’t understand what the nurse is trying to say.”

The health system itself can also be a barrier, Mabasa said, with facilities sometimes lacking the capacity to meet demand.

South Africa’s public health system is already under pressure, with healthcare workers expected to serve large numbers of patients with limited resources. “Sometimes we don’t have enough capacity,” she said.

For migrants without legal documentation, simply walking into a health facility can carry its own risks.

Mabasa said the inconsistency is also evident in how individual facilities apply the rules. At one clinic, a nurse might demand a passport and ask about visa status before offering care; at another nearby, staff assists without question. “Someone would say, ‘ No, before I assist you, I need to see your passport,” she said. “And then you go to another place… someone is willing to say, ‘ Let me provide a service without even asking that information.”

For migrants already facing economic hardship, private healthcare may not be a realistic alternative. Mabasa rejected the assumption that foreign nationals can simply turn to medical aid or private facilities. “Someone is in an economic crisis. They can’t even afford private services,” she said.

Fear can be an equally powerful barrier. Migrant women with expired documentation may worry that visiting a health facility could expose them to authorities and result in deportation.

“My documents have expired; I’ll be deported to my country,” Mabasa said, describing the fear that can keep migrants away from health facilities. For pregnant women, the consequences of delayed care can be particularly serious. She said fear of stigma and discrimination could discourage women from seeking antenatal services early in pregnancy, leaving some to arrive at facilities only when they are close to giving birth.

Distance and transport costs add another obstacle, particularly for migrant women living far from healthcare facilities. She also pointed to another challenge: the mobility of migrant communities. Women and families who cross borders or provinces for work could have implications for access to healthcare, education and support networks.

If a woman is on HIV treatment, contraception, antenatal care or other services, she may find herself in a different province and health facility, and this may disrupt continuity of care.

Leaving no one behind

Denying migrants healthcare can have implications far beyond the individual. Some may feel pressured to disclose their HIV status in an effort to access care, breaching their confidentiality and exposing them to stigma and discrimination. Delayed access to treatment can worsen illness and increase the risk of transmission of infectious diseases such as HIV and TB, and preventable complications can place additional strain on an already-overburdened health system.

The impact can be on livelihoods, as untreated illness can mean migrants are unable to work or run businesses, affecting their families and communities.

It’s about dignity, it’s about equality. Turning people away when they need care most risks deepening vulnerability and undermining the values South Africa’s Constitution seeks to protect.

Mabasa cautioned against placing the entire burden on healthcare workers.

She called for standardising facility-level protocols so that access doesn’t depend on which nurse is on duty; training healthcare workers not just clinically but on migrants’ actual legal rights, so that staff aren’t the ones improvising immigration policy at the point of care; integrating services so women aren’t forced into multiple costly visits; and building coordination between health departments, home affairs and civil society rather than leaving each to work in isolation.

South Africa has made progress toward the UNAIDS 95-95-95 HIV targets, but gaps remain. Mabasa said that excluding migrant women from healthcare also threatens progress made in the wider HIV response.

“We need to make sure that we leave no one behind,” she said.

Russia: New rules require health services to report HIV among foreign nationals

Medical organisations required to report foreign nationals’ HIV infections to the Ministry of the Interior

Translated with Deepl.com – Scroll down for original article in Russian.

Medical organisations will be required to provide the Ministry of the Interior and Rospotrebnadzor with information on infections among foreign nationals, including HIV, and cases of drug use, should such cases be identified whilst providing medical care. This was reported by the press office of the Russian Ministry of Health, according to ‘Interfax’.

The ministry has drawn up a draft order to this effect. The initiative is aimed at safeguarding the public health and epidemiological well-being of the Russian population and ensuring the accuracy of information regarding the medical assessments of foreign nationals, the ministry clarified.

The draft has been drawn up to implement the law requiring foreign nationals to undergo a medical examination within 30 days of entering Russia and annually thereafter. Foreign nationals themselves must pay for these examinations.

All medical certificates will be in electronic form and will be stored in the Unified State Healthcare Information System (EGISZ). Healthcare organisations will be required to transmit the information to the Ministry of the Interior and Rospotrebnadzor within 24 hours to prevent documents from circulating outside the system.

Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a law in June establishing a standard timeframe for compulsory medical examinations for foreign nationals. According to the document, migrant workers and foreign nationals planning to stay in Russia for more than 90 days must undergo a medical examination within 30 days of entering the country.

The examination includes testing for drug use, dangerous infectious diseases and HIV. The costs of the medical examination are borne by the foreign nationals themselves or their employers, and it may only be carried out by authorised medical organisations.

Медорганизации обяжут сообщать в МВД о ВИЧ-инфекциях иностранцев

Медицинские организации должны будут передать в МВД и Роспотребнадзор сведения об инфекциях иностранцев, в том числе о ВИЧ-инфекции, и случаях употребления наркотиков, если такие будут выявлены во время оказания медицинской помощи. Об этом сообщилив пресс-службе Минздрава России, передает «Интерфакс».

Ведомство разработало соответствующий проект приказа. Инициатива направлена на сохранение санитарно-эпидемического благополучия населения России и обеспечение достоверности сведений о медзаключениях граждан других стран, уточнили в министерстве.

Проект разработан для реализации закона, обязующего иностранцев проходить медосмотр в течение 30 дней с моменте въезда в Россию и далее ежегодно. При этом оплачивать прохождение осмотра должны сами граждане других стран.

Все медицинские заключения будут в электронной форме, их разместят в Единой государственной информационной системе здравоохранения (ЕГИСЗ). В течение суток медорганизации должны будут передать информацию в МВД и Роспотребнадзор, чтобы избежать оборота документов вне системы.

Президент России Владимир Путин подписал закон, устанавливающий единый срок обязательного медицинского освидетельствования для иностранных граждан, в июне. Согласно документу, проходить медосмотр в течение 30 дней после въезда в страну должны трудовые мигранты и иностранцы, планирующие находиться в России более 90 дней.

Обследование включает проверку на употребление наркотических веществ, наличие опасных инфекционных заболеваний и ВИЧ. Расходы на медосвидетельствование возлагаются на самих иностранцев или их работодателей, а проводить его смогут только уполномоченные медицинские организации.

Russia: HIV-positive foreign national to be deported from the Amur Region

The court reached this decision on the grounds that the disease could pose a threat to public health

BLAGOVESHCHENSK, A court in the Amur Region has ruled to deport an HIV-positive foreign national from Kazakhstan on the grounds that the disease could pose a threat to public health. The man will be deported despite being married to a Russian woman, according to the Blagoveshchensk City Court.

“The court has ruled that the deportation from Russia of an HIV-positive foreign national is lawful, despite his marriage to a Russian woman,” the statement reads.

It has been established that in September 2025, Rospotrebnadzor in the Amur Region ruled that it was undesirable for the Kazakhstani citizen to remain in Russia. The reason was a medical report confirming that he was HIV-positive. Under federal law, the presence of a foreign national with such a condition poses a threat to public health.

The man was informed of the decision in October 2025. By that time, he was already married to a Russian citizen. He disagreed with Rospotrebnadzor’s decision and filed a claim with the Blagoveshchensk City Court. In his statement, he argued that he was under medical supervision, undergoing treatment, posed no danger to others and was participating in a state programme for the voluntary resettlement of compatriots. The court did not accept the claimant’s arguments. The key issue was that the marriage was registered on 4 October 2025. This took place after Rospotrebnadzor’s decision, which was issued on 26 September 2025. The application for registration was submitted on 2 September, by which time the man was already aware of his diagnosis.

The court stated that the rule exempting HIV-positive foreign nationals with families in Russia from being deemed undesirable cannot be applied retrospectively. At the time the decision was made, the man was not married to a Russian citizen; therefore, there were grounds for his expulsion. The court also rejected the reference to participation in the state programme for the resettlement of compatriots. The programme’s rules state that a participant’s status is forfeited if they have not provided medical documents confirming the absence of infectious diseases posing a threat to others, or if a decision has been made declaring their presence in Russia undesirable.

The man disagreed with the decision of the Blagoveshchensk City Court and lodged an appeal. However, the Amur Regional Court upheld the decision of the court of first instance and dismissed the man’s appeal. The ruling has become final.