The Federal Court dismisses the appeal of a St. Gallen girl not vaccinated against measles, who had been expelled from her school for two weeks. The authorities had taken this action after the appearance of a case in his class.
Represented by her parents, the schoolgirl argued that the administration of antibodies would be a less restrictive measure than temporary exclusion. However, she requested that immunoglobulins be given not to herself but to children who cannot be vaccinated.
This argument is untenable, said the Federal Court in a judgment released Thursday. According to the law on epidemics (LEp), a sick, presumed sick, infected or presumed infected person may be subject to a total or partial ban on practicing his profession or certain activities.
Exclusion justified
These conditions were met when the girl was excluded in 2017: sick, she had already missed classes for a week. The authorities then considered that a ban under SARA was appropriate.
The measures must be proportionate and preference must be given to a less restrictive means, recognize the judges of Mon Repos. However, the principle of proportionality does not allow measures to be taken against third parties. SARA does not provide for this.
Vaccination or antibody
The Federal Court thus confirms the decision rendered by the Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen. In 2019, the latter rejected the student’s appeal.
According to the FOPH directive, unvaccinated people exposed to measles are in principle deprived of access to facilities or excluded from activities. Such eviction may be waived if the person receives a vaccination within 72 hours of the first exposure.
The administration of immunoglobulins has the same effects according to the FOPH. But it is mainly intended for people with an increased risk of complications. (judgment 2C_395 / 2019 of June 8, 2020)
/ ATS
–
– .
