30.11.2021 – 01:00
The Giessen lawyer Steffen Augsberg has opposed the introduction of a general vaccination requirement. Augsberg wrote in the “Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger” (Tuesday edition) apply equally – but ultimately burden them very differently depending on the individual and social situation “.
Augsberg, who has been a member of the German Ethics Council since 2016, also raised constitutional concerns. Regional differences in the success of the pandemic fight against the view that all other possibilities had been exhausted to achieve a higher vaccination rate. This calls into question the required proportionality of a general vaccination requirement. In addition, it is relevant for the constitutional assessment, among other things, who is included in the group of those subject to vaccination, which vaccinations include and which sanctions are provided. “Concrete objectives would have to be disclosed and explained. For example, it makes a considerable difference whether it is primarily about protection of others or at least also about self-protection. In any case, if minors and children are included, the range of what is permissible is likely to be overstretched,” Augsberg continued .
According to the lawyer, the debate about general compulsory vaccination is also problematic from a democratic point of view: “The unwise policy stipulation that there will be no compulsory vaccination makes the current U-turn appear to be a broken word. Trust, which is so important for the important vaccination campaign, is falling. “
Phone: 0221 224 2080
Original content from: Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger, transmitted by news aktuell