When there is talk of a mandatory vaccination, one quickly imagines two police officers holding an unwilling person and then a doctor in a white coat comes and sets the syringe. But that’s not how it would work.
Some now write of broken words when they talk about mandatory vaccination – in fact, politicians of all stripes had excluded this. Until now: The future Chancellor Olaf Scholz wants it after all. The Bundestag should pass it next spring, in early February or early March, he said on Tuesday. He knows a majority of the population behind him: According to the trend barometer from RTL and ntv, 71 percent of those surveyed by Forsa are in favor – tendency: rising.
But the term alone triggers fears and invites misunderstandings. For example, on that “duty” would mean that everyone has to be vaccinated against the coronavirus. First of all, there will be some exceptions. This affects people who drop out for medical reasons. It is also still open to what extent children and young people should be obliged. But the biggest misunderstanding is that it could actually result in a forced vaccination – and that will not be the case.
The scenario that someone is being held by two strong men and then a third person comes with a syringe in hand and injects the writhing person with the vaccine – that’s more for horror movies. That is exactly what it should not do. Because that would be a compulsory vaccination, and it is important to distinguish it from the compulsory vaccination. Compulsory vaccination means that everyone has to be vaccinated. The question is, what should be the punishment for not doing it?
Fine? Pay the hospital yourself?
Fines are under discussion here. A violation of the vaccination requirement would then be an administrative offense and not a criminal offense. So something like wrong parking rather than something like a robbery. What if you consistently refuse to pay the fine? Do you have to go to jail then? This is a sensitive question that has yet to be resolved. The Baden-Württemberg Prime Minister Winfried Kretschmann ruled that out last week. Administrative lawyer Joachim Wieland thinks this is possible, as he said in an interview with ntv.de. He considers a prison sentence to be constitutionally problematic.
Another possible punishment would be to withdraw their health insurance from the unvaccinated in the event of a corona disease. Then they would have to pay for treatment themselves. As soon as you get to the hospital or even to the intensive care unit, that would mean many thousands of euros in costs. According to Wieland, the state could also make benefits dependent on the presence of a vaccination certificate, for example with the child allowance. If necessary, the state could also withdraw the driver’s license. Persistent vaccination refusals would also have to expect the loss of their job. Especially if they would pose a risk to colleagues or customers. The legal hurdles for this are currently still high. But if there is a general compulsory vaccination, that could change. In short: Nobody would be forced to do anything, but it would be very uncomfortable for those who refused to vaccinate.
Legally, compulsory vaccination would be uncharted territory. Nothing like this has ever existed in the planned form – not with measles and not with smallpox. Because with measles, it only applies to children in schools and daycare centers. In the case of smallpox, it was justified by the fact that it could eradicate the disease. However, this will not be the case with the coronavirus and Covid-19, especially since the existing vaccines do not offer permanent protection. At some point the virus will lose its horror because people are fundamentally immune to it – but it will stay between us.
Lawyers consider duty to be possible
Last week, however, several lawyers said that a general compulsory vaccination would still be possible. Administrative lawyer Wieland told ntv.de that a vaccination requirement seemed “justifiable”. The constitutional court would only intervene if the state decides something completely wrong within its discretion. The administrative lawyer Hinnerk Wißmann from the University of Munster told the “Welt” that an imprisonment was the milder means “if the alternative is to abolish the free state in endless lockdown loops”. Uwe Volkmann, professor for public law at the Goethe University Frankfurt, said that the “depth of intervention” is less than “the serious restrictions of freedom that would otherwise be necessary”.
If the Bundestag decides on the compulsory vaccination in the spring, there should be a majority in favor. Not only in the SPD and the Greens, but also in the Union and perhaps also on the left, there are likely to be many MPs who are in favor. Only the AfD is a clear candidate for a no. But there are also reservations in the FDP. As liberals, you find it very difficult to deal with a state that imposes such strict regulations on people. It will therefore be exciting to see whether the Ampel coalition will get its own majority for it. If FDP MPs vote against it, it would be embarrassing for the traffic light. Scholz tries to make it less explosive by declaring the vaccination obligation to be a decision of conscience.
The temptation to say yes is likely to be great for many MEPs. If one believes scientists like the Saarbrücken pharmacy professor Thorsten Lehr, compulsory vaccination would be a breakthrough. At “RTL direkt” he said last week that she could “suddenly” change the situation. “The end of the pandemic is in our hands with the compulsory vaccination.” In spring there is no getting around her.