Since the adoption of the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) in 2003, public health professionals have debated similar conventions covering other health risks, including potentially a Framework Convention on Alcohol Control. Much of this debate has focused on the merits of binding versus non-binding instruments in terms of commitments at the international level. In this paper, I draw on lessons from the WHO FCTC to discuss instead what the difference between binding and non-binding international legal instruments might mean for domestic legal frameworks for implementing regulatory measures for alcohol control. The paper looks at possible impacts on the authority of various national authorities to implement new measures, the ability of civil society to bring cases compelling more comprehensive regulatory measures and the defence of litigation brought by commercial-sector actors to prevent, delay or weaken the implementation of laws and regulations. It reflects on what lessons these might have for alcohol control governance.

中文翻译：

---

具有约束力的酒精控制国际法律文书会产生什么不同？世界卫生组织烟草控制框架公约对国内诉讼的影响的经验教训

自 2003 年通过世界卫生组织 (WHO) 烟草控制框架公约 (FCTC) 以来，公共卫生专业人员一直在讨论涵盖其他健康风险的类似公约，包括可能的酒精控制框架公约。这场辩论的大部分重点是在国际层面的承诺方面，具有约束力的文书与不具有约束力的文书的优点。在本文中，我借鉴了世界卫生组织烟草控制框架公约的经验，讨论了具有约束力和不具有约束力的国际法律文书之间的区别对于实施酒精控制监管措施的国内法律框架可能意味着什么。该文件着眼于对各个国家当局实施新措施的权威可能产生的影响，民间社会提起诉讼的能力，迫使采取更全面的监管措施，并为商业部门行为者提起的诉讼辩护，以防止、延迟或削弱法律法规的实施。它反映了这些可能对酒精控制治理产生的教训。