Symbolic image of vaccination © Guido Kirchner
Debate continues over possible special rules for vaccinated people. The Berlin constitutional law expert Christoph Mollers has now criticized the statement of the German Ethics Council in this regard.
Mollers told Deutschlandfunk radio that in many places the paper does not provide ethical arguments, but rather political ones that "hold the store together a bit".
Mollers supported the Ethics Council's demand that no further decisions be made until it is certain whether vaccination actually removes infectiousness. "The only question, even then, is: When exactly did this evidence actually occur, and who makes the presumption rule when we don't know for sure."
For him, the statement falls short of the insight that freedom is the norm and restrictions are actually the exception, said the constitutional law expert. It's also difficult to justify freedom restrictions by saying other people also have freedom restrictions, he says. It could also be a form of solidarity, he says, if people who have not yet been vaccinated allowed vaccinated fellow citizens certain freedoms and opportunities.
Lawsuits expected
Mollers expects that people who are socially or economically existentially affected by lockdown regulations will sue against restrictions.
The German Ethics Council had a statement Thursday titled "Special rights for vaccinated people?" presented. In it, he recommends that pandemic-related government restrictions on freedom not be lifted for now, even for those who have been vaccinated. Council recommends exceptions for nursing homes and hospices. Among the arguments he cites in support of his recommendation is that non-vaccinated people may perceive possible exemptions as unfair, and he calls on vaccinated people to show solidarity.