Vaccination obligation Austria: “We don’t want to swing from lockdown to lockdown”
“We don’t want to swing from lockdown to lockdown anymore”
Austria introduces compulsory vaccination at the beginning of February
Austria introduces compulsory vaccination against the corona virus. It should apply from the beginning of February. At the beginning there should be a transition phase, according to Chancellor Nehammer.
In Austria, compulsory vaccination will come into force in a few weeks. Constitutional Minister Karoline Edtstadler explains how this is intended to prevent new corona restrictions – and why she is not only using the measure as a short-term instrument.
Karoline Edtstadler (40) has been Minister for the EU and the Constitution in Austria since January 2020. In the interview, she explains how a general obligation to vaccinate is legally justified – and why she considers the measure to be useful despite the decreasing effectiveness against the Omikron variant.
WHEA: Minister, Austria will be the first country in the EU to introduce compulsory vaccination at the beginning of February. Why this rush?
Caroline Edtstadler: We have no time to lose, the full immunization of unvaccinated people takes at least four and a half months. All arguments have now been exchanged. Citizens and organizations have submitted more than 100,000 comments on the ministerial draft, which we are also examining. Now we want to achieve a broad consensus in Parliament in the coming weeks.
WHEA: Can such a serious restriction of individual freedoms be justified at all?
Edtstadler: The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) made it clear in a judgment of April 2021, which referred to a complaint from the Czech Republic about the vaccination requirement for minors, that this vaccination requirement is legally compliant. The encroachment on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, i.e. the fundamental right to respect for private and family life, can also be justified by compulsory vaccination.
Karoline Edtstadler: “Unfortunately, penalties are necessary to enforce compulsory vaccination”
Source: imago images/Eibner Europe
WHEA: However, this only applies under certain conditions.
Edtstadler: Yes, of couse. Firstly, the goal must be clearly defined. The aim in this case is health protection and the maintenance of a functioning health care system. Second: the measure must be proportionate. We decided to make vaccinations compulsory in Austria when we were about to face another lockdown. Our consideration was: We no longer want to swing from lockdown to lockdown – which also means a massive restriction of fundamental rights – and instead rely on a high vaccination rate. And the third requirement for a constitutional obligation to vaccinate is that there must be an effective means, i.e. the vaccination must be effective.
WHEA: But the current vaccine does not prevent infection with omicron or transmission of the virus by infected people.
Edtstadler: That’s correct. However, we know from the experts that the current vaccination protects against a severe course of the disease in around 90 percent of cases and prevents someone from having to be treated in intensive care in more than 90 percent of cases. Those are very strong arguments. One should not only see compulsory vaccination in the short term, it is aimed at the future. We want to be prepared for the coming fall and winter.
WHEA: But shouldn’t one be careful with mandatory vaccination when it is not yet possible to foresee whether the vaccine available in autumn will actually work and can prevent a new autumn wave of corona?
Edtstadler: I’ll say it again: we have to prepare now so that we are prepared in the event of a new corona wave in the second half of the year. Of course we don’t know today what else the virus has in store for us and whether there WILL be other variants. We have to constantly evaluate that. For example, the next virus mutation in the fall should be less dangerous than the current omicron variant, so we have to react. A quick response to the outside possibility could be by means of an alleged decree authorization that has to be approved by Parliament. This means we are as flexible as possible.
WHEA: Anyone who violates the vaccination obligation should pay. Why?
Edtstadler: Penalties are unfortunately necessary in order to enforce compulsory vaccination. The punishment must not be too low for it to be taken seriously. However, it must not be too high either, so that it does not generate even more resistance among those affected. The penalty for violations of the vaccination requirement will also depend on the amount of income, the maximum penalty should be 3,600 euros. This is appropriate from the government’s point of view. The aim remains to convince people and not primarily to punish them.
The interview with Karoline Edtstadler was conducted using Microsoft Teams.
