With Judgment No 15 of 9 February 2023, the Italian Constitutional Court upheld the legitimacy of the compulsory vaccination against COVID-19 imposed on specific categories of workers and of the consequences of non-compliance. This contribution analyses the reasoning of both the referring judges and the Constitutional Court, to understand whether the latter’s conclusion can be said to be persuasive. In this respect, it is first maintained that the Court was correct in justifying the limitation on the right not to be subject to unwanted health treatments since the right to health also entails the State’s obligation to protect public health. What appears to be questionable is the Court’s finding that the exclusion of suspended workers from the maintenance benefits or any form of social security is constitutionally legitimate. A more careful consideration of international human rights law might perhaps have led the Court to a different conclusion.
COVID-19 Compulsory Vaccination for Specific Categories of Workers and the Socio-Economic Consequences of Non-compliance before Italy’s Constitutional Court: A Public Health and Human Rights Analysis / Greco, Donato. - In: JOURNAL OF GLOBAL HEALTH LAW. - ISSN 2976-5951. - 1:1(2024), pp. 106-118. [10.4337/jghl.2024.01.06]
COVID-19 Compulsory Vaccination for Specific Categories of Workers and the Socio-Economic Consequences of Non-compliance before Italy’s Constitutional Court: A Public Health and Human Rights Analysis
donato greco
2024
Abstract
With Judgment No 15 of 9 February 2023, the Italian Constitutional Court upheld the legitimacy of the compulsory vaccination against COVID-19 imposed on specific categories of workers and of the consequences of non-compliance. This contribution analyses the reasoning of both the referring judges and the Constitutional Court, to understand whether the latter’s conclusion can be said to be persuasive. In this respect, it is first maintained that the Court was correct in justifying the limitation on the right not to be subject to unwanted health treatments since the right to health also entails the State’s obligation to protect public health. What appears to be questionable is the Court’s finding that the exclusion of suspended workers from the maintenance benefits or any form of social security is constitutionally legitimate. A more careful consideration of international human rights law might perhaps have led the Court to a different conclusion.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
jghl-article-p106.pdf
Solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
Versione dell'editore
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione
131.92 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
131.92 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.