A/HRC/4/28 page 19 constituted a violation of her right to appropriate health-care services, as well as her right to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of her children. The Committee decided that Hungary had failed to provide Andrea with appropriate information and advice on family planning and ensure that Andrea had given her fully informed consent to the operation and it recommended that the Government provide the applicant with appropriate compensation. 4. Good quality 75. Health facilities, goods and services must be scientifically and medically appropriate and of good quality. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh considered this requirement in Dr. Mohiuddin Farooque v. Bangladesh.58 Dr. Farooque challenged the failure of the authorities to take effective measures to deal with a large consignment of imported skimmed milk powder that contained radioactive material. The court found that the contaminated powder was a threat to health and thereby gave rise to a breach of the right to life under the Constitution.59 Through an interpretation of a constitutional provision that requires the State to improve the quality of health and nutrition,60 the court interpreted the right to life to include, among others, the “protection of health and normal longevity of an ordinary human being”. The court ordered the Government to test the consignment’s radiation level. 76. At the end of this section, the Special Rapporteur makes two observations. First, it will be recalled that some of the requirements signalled in the previous paragraphs have to be understood in the context of resource availability. The right to health demands better access to a wider range of medicines in high-income than in low-income countries. In Canada, sign-language interpretation for the deaf is required (Eldridge), but in a low-income country less costly measures to enhance access for those with disabilities will be acceptable. Second, not all elements of the right to health demand many resources. The Szijjarto case demanded respectful treatment, Farooque required quality controls on food imports, K.L. v. Peru (see next section) could be addressed by appropriate guidelines, and so on. Even with very limited resources, there is much that States can do to realize the right to the highest attainable standard of health. D. The duties to respect, protect and fulfil 77. Human rights place duties on States to respect, protect and fulfil. Thus, States have duties to respect, protect and fulfil the right to the highest attainable standard of health.61 1. Respect 78. The duty to respect requires the State to refrain from denying or limiting equal access for all persons, including prisoners, minorities, asylum-seekers and illegal immigrants, to preventive, curative and palliative health services.62 79. The case of D. v. United Kingdom concerned the proposed deportation by the British authorities of a man dying from AIDS to St. Kitts, his country of origin.63 D. had been diagnosed with HIV while in a British prison. He applied for permission to remain in the United Kingdom after the end of his prison sentence on compassionate grounds. His deportation to St. Kitts would entail a loss of the medical treatment he was receiving. The European Court of Human Rights found that “the abrupt withdrawal of medical treatment caused by the