The President of the European Commission, Ursula van der Leyen, recently called on the governments of the Member States of the European Union to “consider” introducing compulsory vaccination against Covid-19. We are convinced that professionally and scientifically sound as well as politically and morally responsible considerations dictate the rejection of this initiative. Therefore, we expect and urge the Government of the Republic of Slovenia to reject the initiatives to introduce compulsory vaccination against Covid-19 in accordance with Slovenian constitutional order and the international legal order and in the interest of the population of our country.
Vaccinations can in principle be legally defined as compulsory, but only if the vaccines have been developed according to established medical-scientific criteria for genuine vaccines and in accordance with applicable law, established scientific procedures and conditions, and requirements of medical ethics and deontology. It is not possible to prove unequivocally that Covid-19 vaccines meet all these scientific and legal (pre)conditions.
The judiciary should have answered the very important legal question of whether Covid-19 vaccines can be used at all long ago. These vaccines are still only experimental from a medical and legal point of view and have only received temporary marketing authorisation in the European Union (for “off-label” use, i.e. “outside the authorisation“). According to the official statement of the Public Agency for Medicines and Medical Devices (JAZMP), there is currently no Covid-19 vaccine on the territory of the Republic of Slovenia, nor on the entire territory of the EU, which would have a standard marketing authorisation for use. However, on the NIJZ website, there is a statement offered to people before vaccination, which includes the sentence “3. A dose of covid mRNA has not yet been registered for use.”
According to the judgment of the ECtHR (Vavrička v. the Czech Republic, 2020), vaccination can be legalized as compulsory and proportionate penalties can be prescribed for refusal to vaccinate, but only if all legal and scientific conditions relating to the necessity, safety and effectiveness of vaccination are met, provided for particularly dangerous communicable diseases with a high mortality rate.
The experience of one year of vaccination against Covid-19 shows that vaccines are not safe and that their effectiveness is limited. While they mitigate the virulence of the disease in individuals in certain cases, they do not protect the community, as they do not prevent infection or transmission. Moreover, Covid-19 is demonstrably and indisputably not a particularly dangerous communicable disease, even though it was included in the first group of most dangerous communicable diseases in the spring of 2020 – but only by Government decision conclusion, not by Act. There are no convincing and absolutely necessary medical and scientific reasons for this classification. Globally, the mortality rate from Covid-19 is 0.15%, three times lower for the population under 70 and significantly lower for the population under 45.
International, common European and Slovenian law does not allow discrimination on the basis of personal circumstances, and the issue of vaccination is a legally relevant personal circumstance. International law – in particular the Nuremberg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Convention of Oviedo – and the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia do not permit human experimentation, which is what the vaccination in question is de facto, or forced medical interventions. Vaccination is also a very invasive and very serious medical intervention in the physical and moral integrity of a human being, which, according to the judgment of the ECtHR (in the case of Solomakhin v. Ukraine, 2012), can also lead to death. The Geneva Declaration of the World Medical Association also categorically prohibits the use of medical knowledge to violate human rights and freedoms.
People who get vaccinated still have the status of “volunteers“. In this way, the authorities and vaccine manufacturers try to avoid legal liability for the harmful effects of vaccination. According to vaccinated people and some media, Slovenia has even offered to sign the above-mentioned statement before vaccination that one accepts responsibility for possible harmful side effects of ‘vaccines’ (the sentence concludes with “I declare that the use of the vaccine outside the approval is my wish and that by signing this form I agree to such vaccination and accept responsibility for my decision“). Such conduct is characterized by reasonable suspicion of committing a criminal offense.
The qualified majority of the Slovenian public may not be sufficiently educated about the fact that vaccinations are not performed everywhere and always in accordance with medical deontology, legislation (especially Patient Rights Act), and clear instructions from the vaccine manufacturers themselves. By this we mean, in particular, a thorough medical and preliminary analysis of the individual’s state of health, responsible execution of precise “informed consent” duties by the medical personnel performing the vaccination, especially with regard to the course, possibilities, possible side effects and effectiveness of the vaccination, specific and precisely prescribed handling of the vaccine before vaccination, and the presence of a physician who carefully examines the individual immediately after vaccination. In fact, current vaccination practice is all too often “drive-in” vaccination, which was intensely and insistently called for in the days leading up to Christmas by the authorities and representatives of the medical profession appearing in the media. Vaccination practices that are inconsistent with deontology, laws, and guidelines provide good grounds for reasonable suspicion of committing a serious crime.
The direct or indirect coercion of people to vaccinate, and even more so the possible official introduction of compulsory vaccination against Covid-19, are in clear and serious contradiction with international law, the constitutional order of the Republic of Slovenia, medical ethics and deontology, general morality and the common good of the people.
Dr. Karel Gržan, pater;
Anton Komat, freelance researcher, publicist and nature conservationist;
Dr. Tomaž Mastnak, sociologist, publicist and civil society activist;
Prof. dr. Gregor Radonjič, professor of commodity and technology science;
Srečko Šorli, Advances of Relativity and Cosmology Research Group;
Assoc. prof. dr. Andraž Teršek, constitutionalist, publicist and civil society activist;
Prof. dr. Boštjan M. Zupančič, former judge of the Slovenian Constitutional Court and the ECtHR.
(December 26, 2021)