ER Editor: We’re happy for the people of Galicia, the north-west region of Spain where mandatory vaccination was being considered a few months ago. See this report from February of this year – Spain’s Galician Health Law Includes Mandatory Vaccination And So Much More …
The date of the story below is July 23, 2021.
The Constitutional Court closes the door on compulsory vaccination with the current law
It approves maintaining the suspension of forced inoculation in Galicia because “it supposes a coercive corporal intervention and practised outside the will of the citizen”.
The Constitutional Court has almost definitively closed the door on the administrations being able to impose forced vaccination, even in a pandemic, at least with the current legislation.
The Plenary of the court, unanimously, has agreed to maintain the suspension of the provisions of number 5 of art. 38.2 b) of the new Galician Health Law, which empowers the regional health authorities to impose compulsory vaccination on Galician citizens, in order to control transmissible infectious diseases (any, not just covid-19) in situations of serious risk to public health.
In summary, the Constitutional Court, whose rapporteur was the magistrate Andrés Ollero, argues that the anti-vaccination measure cannot be imposed because there is currently no legal cover to punish refusal to be inoculated. The ruling stresses that compulsory vaccination is not a preventive measure that is expressly contemplated in Organic Law 3/1986, on Special Public Health Measures, so there is no legal umbrella that covers a forced injection that “involves a coercive bodily intervention carried out outside the will of the citizen”.
The court alleges that lifting the suspension of the precept that authorises the forced vaccination of Galicians, which it decreed last April, could “cause certain and effective damage that could be irreparable or difficult to repair, insofar as the vaccination could be imposed against the will of the citizen”.
Last spring, the Court of Guarantees automatically put part of the new Health Law on ‘stand by’ after admitting an appeal for unconstitutionality presented on 30 March by the central government against the reform of the regulation promoted by the regional executive of Alberto Núñez Feijóo and approved by the regional parliament.
Pedro Sánchez’s government appealed against the law, on the grounds that it limited the fundamental rights of citizens, something that should be done through an organic law and not through a regional regulation.
The ruling announced this Friday, according to court sources, is not the final ruling on this controversy, but it does anticipate the position of the Constitutional Court, which is unlikely to contradict itself with a ruling that is contradictory to today’s resolution.
Numerous legal experts have argued since the beginning of the health crisis that compulsory vaccination could only be imposed by a thorough reform of the current Public Health legislation of 1986 or by a pandemic law.
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.