In the master's thesis, mandatory vaccination is analyzed through the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia. Mandatory vaccination is first defined, followed by aspects related to the European Convention of Human Rights and the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia. Mandatory vaccination is permissible. The courts have confirmed in all analyzed cases that mandatory vaccination is a proportionate measure for controlling and preventing the spread of infectious diseases, and they are most likely to continue making such decisions in the future. The European Court of Human Rights has determined that states are best placed to assess the necessary measures for preventing and controlling the spread of infectious diseases, making mandatory vaccination a matter of the state's margin of appreciation. The permissibility of mandatory vaccination is also supported by the theory, particularly in relation to the Vavřička case, which argues that court decisions should be less generalized and that courts should consider the characteristics of each vaccination case. Therefore, the conditions required for mandatory vaccination to be permissible are presented.
|
