It has now been over two years since the bad story of Covid-19 began has compromised several personal freedoms, initiating through the introduction of the lockdown, of the mandatory masks, the social distancing, the green pass, the mandatory vaccination for the over 50s and the health personnel an ideological division between people destined to be discussed even today. Many citizens determined in wanting to defend personal freedoms and free vaccination choice have been suspended from their jobs in order to maintain their ideals and values.
In this regard, the decision of judge Susanna Zanda of the civil section of the ordinary court of Florence which suspends the provision of the Order of Psychologists of Tuscany which prohibited a doctor from exercising her profession as a psychologist because she was not vaccinated. “The suspension of the exercise of the profession risks compromising the individual’s primary assets such as the right to support and the right to work pursuant to art. 4 understood as an expression of the freedom of the person and his dignity, guaranteed precisely by the freedom from need ”, is written among the premises. This ruling, dated 6 July 2022, is published on the website of the Order of Surgeons and Dentists of the province of Ferrara.
When the aim of “preventing illness and ensuring safety conditions in the health sector” is mentioned, it is argued that “this aim is unattainable because it is the Aifa reports themselves that affirm it”. Reference is then made to a “phenomenon opposite to what one wanted to achieve with vaccination, that is, a spread of the infection with the formation of multiple viral variants and the numerical prevalence of infections and deaths among the subjects vaccinated with three doses”.
In contesting the vaccination obligation, the measure mentions art. 32 paragraph 2 of the Constitution: “After the experience of Nazi-Fascism, it does not allow the individual to be sacrificed for a true or supposed collective interest, and even less allows him to be subjected to invasive medical experiments on the person, without his free and informed consent”. But this is not conceivable for the judge “when the components of the serums and the mechanism of their functioning is, as in this case, covered not only by trade secret but also, incomprehensibly, by” military “secret”.
For the judge, moreover, the psychologist cannot be “forced, in order to support herself and her family, to these experimental injection treatments so invasive to insinuate themselves into its DNA altering it in a way that could be irreversible, with currently unpredictable effects on his life and health ”. The text of the provision also disputes the fact that to date “the components of the serums and the medium and long-term effects are not known as written by the manufacturers themselves, while it is known that in the short term they have already caused thousands of deaths and events serious adverse events “.
Furthermore, it is pointed out that “the various international conventions signed by Italy prohibit the imposition of health treatments without the consent of the interested party because it would harmed his dignity and that the Constitution “does not allow the State and all its central and peripheral apparatuses to impose any obligation of medical treatment without the consent of the interested party”. The judge also notes “an undeniable discrimination with respect to vaccinated colleagues who can continue to work while having the same chance of becoming infected and transmitting the virus”.
A new sentence, therefore, which protects the freedom of the human person as a universal value.
Carlo Toto, July 14, 2022