In the court documents, it is stated that the agreement on the establishment of the EAEU separates social security and medical assistance, treating them as distinct categories. The right of workers and their families to medical assistance is enshrined in a specific provision outlined in paragraph 4 of Article 98 of this treaty, as well as in Appendix No. 30, which is dedicated to medical assistance.
The court emphasized that these provisions define the procedure, scope, and conditions for providing medical assistance, excluding the automatic issuance of CHI policies for the family members of migrants unless stipulated by the national laws of the member states or international agreements.
In a separate opinion by one of the judges, it is noted that this approach is driven by differences in social security and health insurance systems in EAEU countries. For instance, Russia employs a budget-insurance model, while other states may use mixed schemes or, in some cases, may not have compulsory health insurance at all. Thus, the regulation of these issues remains within the competence of each state.
Nevertheless, emergency medical assistance is provided to all family members of labor migrants on the territory of EAEU countries.
According to the judge, CHI funds may be considered when reimbursing expenses for medical services for the insured, but this does not imply the automatic issuance of policies.
On January 27, Kyrgyzstan submitted a request to the EAEU court for clarification on the terms of the treaty, pointing to Russia's failure to fulfill its obligations regarding labor migrants. The statement claimed that the agreement between EAEU states guarantees family members of labor migrants access to compulsory health insurance (CHI) policies.
