Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme Court

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Lima, Jordão Horácio da Silva
Data de Publicação: 2021
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário (Online)
Texto Completo: https://www.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br/index.php/cadernos/article/view/762
Resumo: Objective: To analyze descriptively the conclusions established in the decisions handed down by the Federal Supreme Court in the judgment of Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality 6586 and 6587 and of the Extraordinary Appeal 1267879 that deal, respectively, with the mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 and the refusal to immunization by philosophical and religious convictions. Methods: exploratory research based on bibliographic review and document analysis, in primary and secondary sources, notably in relation to the texts of international agreements, information, data, reports extracted from Brazilian government agencies, including decisions handed down in higher courts. Results: research has shown that mandatory vaccination has long been a reality in Brazil, and has provision for in several legal instruments. At no time did such provisions have their legality and legitimacy actively and emphatically questioned. Conclusion: the study points out that the Brazilian Constitutional Supreme Court, when carrying out the necessary balance of interests and principles, in particular the intangibility of the human body and the inviolability of the home, and the realization of the collective right to health, contended that the compulsory nature of the vaccine as a way of meeting the public interest in the eradication of the virus responsible for the pandemic, it does not offend the constitution, reinforcing that the obligation of the vaccine cannot be understood as forced vaccination, being guaranteed to the administered the right of refusal to undergo immunization.
id FIOCRUZ-3_a07eb8d916ad76392f9a8896e39c80dd
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br:article/762
network_acronym_str FIOCRUZ-3
network_name_str Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme CourtVacunación obligatoria desde la perspectiva del Supremo Tribunal FederalA vacinação obrigatória na perspectiva do Supremo Tribunal FederalVacunaciónObligatoriedadCOVID-19Supremo Tribunal FederalVacinação ObrigatoriedadeCOVID-19 Supremo Tribunal FederalVaccination ObligatorinessCOVID-19Federal Supreme CourtObjective: To analyze descriptively the conclusions established in the decisions handed down by the Federal Supreme Court in the judgment of Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality 6586 and 6587 and of the Extraordinary Appeal 1267879 that deal, respectively, with the mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 and the refusal to immunization by philosophical and religious convictions. Methods: exploratory research based on bibliographic review and document analysis, in primary and secondary sources, notably in relation to the texts of international agreements, information, data, reports extracted from Brazilian government agencies, including decisions handed down in higher courts. Results: research has shown that mandatory vaccination has long been a reality in Brazil, and has provision for in several legal instruments. At no time did such provisions have their legality and legitimacy actively and emphatically questioned. Conclusion: the study points out that the Brazilian Constitutional Supreme Court, when carrying out the necessary balance of interests and principles, in particular the intangibility of the human body and the inviolability of the home, and the realization of the collective right to health, contended that the compulsory nature of the vaccine as a way of meeting the public interest in the eradication of the virus responsible for the pandemic, it does not offend the constitution, reinforcing that the obligation of the vaccine cannot be understood as forced vaccination, being guaranteed to the administered the right of refusal to undergo immunization.Objetivo: analizar descriptivamente las conclusiones establecidas en las decisiones dictadas por el Supremo Tribunal Federal en la sentencia de Acciones Directas de Inconstitucionalidad 6586 y 6587 y del Recurso Extraordinario con Apelación 1.267.879 que tratan, respectivamente, de la vacunación obligatoria contra COVID-19 y la negativa a la inmunización por convicciones filosóficas y religiosas. Metodología: investigación exploratoria basada en revisión bibliográfica y análisis de documentos, en fuentes primarias y secundarias, notablemente en relación con los textos de acuerdos internacionales, información, datos, informes extraídos de agencias gubernamentales brasileñas, incluyendo decisiones tomadas en tribunales superiores. Resultados: la investigación ha demostrado que la vacunación obligatoria es una realidad desde hace mucho tiempo en Brasil, y está prevista en varios instrumentos legales. En ningún momento se cuestionó activa y enfáticamente la legalidad y legitimidad de tales disposiciones. Conclusión: el estudio señala que la Corte Suprema Constitucional brasileña, al realizar el necesario equilibrio de intereses y principios, en particular la intangibilidad del cuerpo humano y la inviolabilidad del hogar, y la realización del derecho colectivo a la salud, argumentó que la obligatoriedad de la vacuna como forma de atender el interés público en la erradicación del virus responsable de la pandemia, no ofende la constitución, reforzando que la obligación de la vacuna no puede entenderse como vacunación forzada, garantizándose a el administrado el derecho de negarse a someterse a la inmunización.Objetivo: analisar descritivamente as conclusões fixadas nas decisões proferidas pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal no julgamento das Ações Direta de Inconstitucionalidade (ADIs) nos 6.586 e 6.587 e do Recurso Extraordinário com Agravo nº 1.267.879 que tratam, respectivamente, da vacinação obrigatória contra a COVID-19 e a recusa à imunização por convicções filosóficas e religiosas. Metodologia: pesquisa exploratória baseada na revisão bibliográfica e na análise documental, em fontes primárias e secundárias, notadamente de textos de acordos internacionais, informações, dados, relatórios extraídos de órgãos governamentais brasileiros, incluindo decisões prolatadas em tribunais superiores. Resultados: a investigação demonstrou que a vacinação obrigatória, desde há muito, é uma realidade no Brasil, estando prevista em diversos diplomas legais. Em tempo algum, tais dispositivos tiveram sua legalidade e legitimidade questionadas de maneira ativa e enfática. Conclusão: o estudo aponta que a Suprema Corte Constitucional brasileira, ao realizar a necessária ponderação de interesses e princípios, em especial a intangibilidade do corpo humano e a inviolabilidade do domicílio, e a efetivação do direito coletivo à saúde, pugnou que a compulsoriedade da vacina como forma de atendimento ao interesse público de erradicação do vírus responsável pela pandemia não ofende a Constituição, reforçando que a obrigatoriedade da vacina não pode ser entendida como vacinação forçada, sendo garantido ao administrado o direito de recusa em se submeter à imunização.Fundação Oswaldo Cruz Brasília2021-03-18info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br/index.php/cadernos/article/view/76210.17566/ciads.v10i1.762Iberoamerican Journal of Health Law; Vol. 10 No. 1 (2021): (JAN./MAR. 2021); 233-247Cuadernos Iberoamericanos de Derecho Sanitario; Vol. 10 Núm. 1 (2021): (ENE./MAR. 2021); 233-247Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário; v. 10 n. 1 (2021): (JAN./MAR. 2021); 233-2472358-18242317-839610.17566/ciads.v10i1reponame:Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário (Online)instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)instacron:FIOCRUZporhttps://www.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br/index.php/cadernos/article/view/762/799Copyright (c) 2021 Jordão Horácio da Silva Limahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLima, Jordão Horácio da SilvaLima, Jordão Horácio da SilvaLima, Jordão Horácio da Silva2021-03-18T14:39:36Zoai:ojs.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br:article/762Revistahttp://www.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.brPUBhttp://www.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br/index.php/cadernos/oaicadernos.direitosanitario@fiocruz.br2358-18242317-8396opendoar:2021-03-18T14:39:36Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário (Online) - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme Court
Vacunación obligatoria desde la perspectiva del Supremo Tribunal Federal
A vacinação obrigatória na perspectiva do Supremo Tribunal Federal
title Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme Court
spellingShingle Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme Court
Lima, Jordão Horácio da Silva
Vacunación
Obligatoriedad
COVID-19
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Vacinação
Obrigatoriedade
COVID-19
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Vaccination
Obligatoriness
COVID-19
Federal Supreme Court
title_short Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme Court
title_full Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme Court
title_fullStr Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme Court
title_full_unstemmed Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme Court
title_sort Mandatory vaccination from the perspective of the Federal Supreme Court
author Lima, Jordão Horácio da Silva
author_facet Lima, Jordão Horácio da Silva
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Lima, Jordão Horácio da Silva
Lima, Jordão Horácio da Silva
Lima, Jordão Horácio da Silva
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Vacunación
Obligatoriedad
COVID-19
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Vacinação
Obrigatoriedade
COVID-19
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Vaccination
Obligatoriness
COVID-19
Federal Supreme Court
topic Vacunación
Obligatoriedad
COVID-19
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Vacinação
Obrigatoriedade
COVID-19
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Vaccination
Obligatoriness
COVID-19
Federal Supreme Court
description Objective: To analyze descriptively the conclusions established in the decisions handed down by the Federal Supreme Court in the judgment of Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality 6586 and 6587 and of the Extraordinary Appeal 1267879 that deal, respectively, with the mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 and the refusal to immunization by philosophical and religious convictions. Methods: exploratory research based on bibliographic review and document analysis, in primary and secondary sources, notably in relation to the texts of international agreements, information, data, reports extracted from Brazilian government agencies, including decisions handed down in higher courts. Results: research has shown that mandatory vaccination has long been a reality in Brazil, and has provision for in several legal instruments. At no time did such provisions have their legality and legitimacy actively and emphatically questioned. Conclusion: the study points out that the Brazilian Constitutional Supreme Court, when carrying out the necessary balance of interests and principles, in particular the intangibility of the human body and the inviolability of the home, and the realization of the collective right to health, contended that the compulsory nature of the vaccine as a way of meeting the public interest in the eradication of the virus responsible for the pandemic, it does not offend the constitution, reinforcing that the obligation of the vaccine cannot be understood as forced vaccination, being guaranteed to the administered the right of refusal to undergo immunization.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-03-18
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br/index.php/cadernos/article/view/762
10.17566/ciads.v10i1.762
url https://www.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br/index.php/cadernos/article/view/762
identifier_str_mv 10.17566/ciads.v10i1.762
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br/index.php/cadernos/article/view/762/799
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Jordão Horácio da Silva Lima
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Jordão Horácio da Silva Lima
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Oswaldo Cruz Brasília
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Oswaldo Cruz Brasília
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Iberoamerican Journal of Health Law; Vol. 10 No. 1 (2021): (JAN./MAR. 2021); 233-247
Cuadernos Iberoamericanos de Derecho Sanitario; Vol. 10 Núm. 1 (2021): (ENE./MAR. 2021); 233-247
Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário; v. 10 n. 1 (2021): (JAN./MAR. 2021); 233-247
2358-1824
2317-8396
10.17566/ciads.v10i1
reponame:Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário (Online)
instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron:FIOCRUZ
instname_str Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron_str FIOCRUZ
institution FIOCRUZ
reponame_str Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário (Online)
collection Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Cadernos Ibero-Americanos de Direito Sanitário (Online) - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv cadernos.direitosanitario@fiocruz.br
_version_ 1798942495785091072