Sicilian Court says compulsory vaccination is illegal, state may not order death of citizens

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – Even if deaths resulting from Covid vaccinations were rare, a single death is enough to make compulsory vaccination illegal. That is the legal opinion of the court in Sicily, which must now be considered by the Constitutional Court.

Italian lawyer Marco Mori states, “Who should determine how many citizens are expendable? This is not something you can discuss. Otherwise, it will lead to Nazism.

Marco Mori reported in a video on the ruling of the Administrative Court in Palermo, Sicily:

This ruled already on March 16, 2022, in 53 pages on the complaint of a student of a nursing course regarding a vaccination against Covid-19 that was compulsory for the study. The university had barred him due to the refusal of the vaccination, which had been imposed on members of nursing professions – against which he took legal action.

The back story was inglorious for the Italian judiciary. The Palermo Administrative Court had dismissed the complaint in the first instance, but the complainant did not give up.

Next, an investigation was ordered by a panel consisting of the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Health, the President of the Higher Institute of Health, and the Director of the General Directorate of Health Prevention. The latter reported on February 25 and explained itself at a hearing on March 16.

The administrative court ultimately reached the extensively reasoned conclusion that mandatory vaccination was unconstitutional under current Italian law. The ruling must now be submitted to the Constitutional Court, which must derive a legally valid decision from it.

FAR MORE SIDE EFFECTS AND DEATHS THAN ANY OTHER VACCINE

The court, represented by five lawyers and chaired by President Rosanna De Nicolis, dealt extensively with the possible side effects of the vaccinations, which can lead to death. In doing so, they made use of the European Union’s Eudravigilance side effect database.

In it, 3,900,241 cases of side effects were recorded by mid-March 2022, of which about 41,834 were fatal.

The court noted that most of the listed side effects are undoubtedly minor. In addition, however, there are also serious side effects that irreversibly endanger the health of the vaccinated. The court doubted that drugs that can also lead to disability or death satisfy constitutional requirements.

Also very significant is the fact that the principle of informed consent of those to be vaccinated cannot be fulfilled. Those who must be vaccinated cannot “voluntarily” consent to this vaccination; this would be factually incompatible.

However, the Court said that one also has to deal with some illogical procedures in the run-up to vaccinations. For example, not even an up-to-date Covid test would be carried out before vaccination.

In already infected persons, however, the risk of an abnormal reaction of the immune system would be very high – in such cases, vaccination should not be carried out at all. This is an aspect that has hardly been raised in the public debate, if at all.

According to Marco Mori, the most important lines of the ruling are the following:

“The standard established by the Constitutional Court for the enforcement of compulsory medical treatment must not include a quantitative assessment. Thus, the admissibility of compulsory vaccination must be excluded if it involves the use of products whose effects on the health of the vaccinated patients exceed the threshold of normal tolerance.”

“This must not include the risk of serious or fatal side effects, even if they are small in relation to the vaccinated population. Even if they are few, only one death is enough to make this unacceptable. Even in the event that we accept the risk of fatal side effects, albeit rare, this criterion would have sensitive ethical implications.”

However, it is to be feared that the necessary examination by the Constitutional Court could prove to be politically motivated, says Mori. In itself, every jurist – according to Mori – should follow the judgment of the Administrative Court.

In this context, he also reminds us that rulings must be substantiated. Unfortunately, it is not known when this court decision can be expected.

The original judgment can be found here.