La proporcionalidad del uso del pasaporte COVID para permitir la apertura del interior de establecimientos abiertos al público: un breve comentario a la sentencia de 14 de septiembre de 2021 del Tribunal Supremo
ISSN: 1134-7198
Año de publicación: 2022
Número: 56
Páginas: 171-186
Tipo: Artículo
Otras publicaciones en: Revista de derecho y genoma humano: genética, biotecnología y medicina avanzada
Resumen
Recently, the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court has ruled on the mandatory exhibition of the COVID passport as a requirement for access to certain establishments open to the public. This measure, postulated by different public administrations to control the spread of the virus, has been questioned by several Superior Courts of Justice on the understanding that it affected fundamental rights. Although the various decisions argue that the limitation of the legal assets at stake is not of particular intensity, the courts have understood that the health authorities have failed to justify the necessity and suitability of the measure. In this way, Superior Courts of justice such as the Canary Islands, Cantabria, Galicia and Andalusia, have denied the ratification of the measures limiting fundamental rights that entailed the use of the COVID passport, having been the decision of the Andalusia court ratified by the Supreme Court. In this new pronouncement the Supreme Court adopts a novel position, marrying the order of the Superior Court of Justice, in this case that of Galicia and ratifying the decision of the Galician administration. The aim of my analysis will be to determine what circumstances have caused the High Court to depart from the precedent, marking a series of criteria that will affect the way that the Superior Courts of Justice face the ratification of this sanitary measure.
Referencias bibliográficas
- LIEW H Chee / FLAHERTY Gerard T., “Immunity passports to travel during the COVID-19 pandemic: controversies and public health risks”, Journal of Public Health, Núm. 1, Vol. 43, 2021
- KOFLER Natalie, BAYLIS Françoise “Ten reasons why immunity passports are a bad idea”, Nature, Vol. 58, 2020
- DE MIGUEL BERIAIN I. / RUEDA, J. “Immunity passports, fundamental rights and public health hazards: a reply to Brown et al”, J. J Med Ethics, Vol. 46, 2020
- SALAMERO TEIXIDÓ, Laura, “Algunas reflexiones sobre la autorización o ratificación judicial de medidas sanitarias al hilo de la aprobación de actos plúrimos para hacer frente a la Covid-19”, Diario La Ley, Núm. 9638, 2020, pp.1-11.
- ÁLVAREZ GARCÍA, Vicente, “La ratificación de las medidas sanitarias de carácter general: su configuración jurisprudencial y sus problemas constitucionales (A propósito de la Sentencia núm. 719/2021, de 24 de mayo, de la Sección Cuarta de la Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo del Tribunal Supremo) Diario del Derecho Iustel, 27 de mayo de 2021
- BOMBILLAR SÁENZ, Francisco Miguel, “Salus publica suprema lex est: intervención administrativa y gestión de la crisis de COVID-19”, ATIENZA MACÍAS, Elena / RODRÍGUEZ AYUSO, Juan Francisco (Dirs.), La respuesta del derecho a la crisis de salud pública, Dykinson, Madrid, 2020, pp. 61-79.
- DE MIGUEL BERIAIN, Iñigo / SANTISTEBAN GALARZA, Mario, “Pasaportes inmunológicos: un comentario ético-jurídico”, El Cronista Del Estado Social y Democrático De Derecho, Núm. 93-94, 2021, pp. 46-51.
- WHO, ““Immunity passports” in the context of COVID-19” 24 April 2020, disponible en: https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/immunity-passports-in-thecontext-of-covid-19