With Judgement n. 14 of 17 February 2023, the Italian Constitutional Court upheld the legitimacy of the compulsory vaccination against COVID-19 that the Italian Government imposed for healthcare workers in 2021. The case provided the Court with the opportunity to clarify some grey areas of its previous case law about compulsory medical treatments, shedding light on the way to strike a balance between individual and collective interests in mass vaccination campaigns. Against this backdrop, this contribution focuses on the interplay between constitutional and international human rights standards regarding the protection of the right to health and informed consent to medical treatments in the context of public health emergencies. While, by applying its previous case law coherently, the Court reached the agreeable conclusion that the COVID-19 compulsory vaccination was legitimate, some questions about mass vaccination remain unsolved. In the filling of these gaps, a role could have been played by a closer review of international human rights standards and case law.
L’obbligo vaccinale dinanzi alla Corte costituzionale: riflessioni sul diritto alla salute e sul consenso informato ai trattamenti sanitari / Bellucci, ELOISA MARIA BENEDICTA; Mariconda, Antonio. - In: DIRITTI UMANI E DIRITTO INTERNAZIONALE. - ISSN 1971-7105. - 17:2(2023), pp. 449-467.
L’obbligo vaccinale dinanzi alla Corte costituzionale: riflessioni sul diritto alla salute e sul consenso informato ai trattamenti sanitari
Eloisa Maria Benedicta Bellucci;Antonio Mariconda
2023
Abstract
With Judgement n. 14 of 17 February 2023, the Italian Constitutional Court upheld the legitimacy of the compulsory vaccination against COVID-19 that the Italian Government imposed for healthcare workers in 2021. The case provided the Court with the opportunity to clarify some grey areas of its previous case law about compulsory medical treatments, shedding light on the way to strike a balance between individual and collective interests in mass vaccination campaigns. Against this backdrop, this contribution focuses on the interplay between constitutional and international human rights standards regarding the protection of the right to health and informed consent to medical treatments in the context of public health emergencies. While, by applying its previous case law coherently, the Court reached the agreeable conclusion that the COVID-19 compulsory vaccination was legitimate, some questions about mass vaccination remain unsolved. In the filling of these gaps, a role could have been played by a closer review of international human rights standards and case law.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Bellucci, Mariconda, DUDI, 2023.pdf
solo utenti autorizzati
Licenza:
Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione
770.06 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
770.06 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


