CURRENT ISSUES OF MANDATORY PROPHYLAXIS VACCINATIONS: THE PRACTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Abstract

Background. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights on compulsory preventive vaccinations is highlighted. The relevance of the study is that in modern conditions, in particular in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the need to ensure public health. The purpose of the study is to generalize the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on compulsory preventive vaccinations and their correlation with the fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen guaranteed by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. 
Methods. Both general and specific methods of legal science were used in the writing of this article, including: the formal-legal method; the system-structural method; the comparative-legal method; the historical-legal method; case analysis; and legal modeling. 
Results. The legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights on mandatory preventive vaccinations are determined, in particular, the European Court of Human Rights recognizes mandatory preventive vaccinations as an interference with the right to respect for private life, provided for by the European Convention, such interference may be justified if there are legitimate grounds, in particular for the purpose of protecting public health. The arguments regarding the correlation of mandatory preventive vaccinations and other human rights and the main restrictions on the rights of unvaccinated persons are considered.  
Conclusions. It is substantiated that the European Court of Human Rights recognizes that mandatory preventive vaccinations constitute an interference with the private life of an individual, but this interference may be justified if it is aimed at protecting public health and meets the criteria of legality and proportionality. It is determined that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights contains different approaches to assessing mandatory preventive vaccinations, which indicates the need to take into account the specific circumstances of each case, the level of risk and the availability of alternative measures, in addition, the legality of restrictions for unvaccinated persons depends on their proportionality and the legitimacy of the goals pursued by the state.