Due to a dispute over the previous mandatory respirators, the teacher filed a constitutional complaint, and he was annoyed by the exception for the vaccinated. Unvaccinated educators must wear a respirator during class during the disputed period, while vaccinated peers do not require mouth and nose protection. In March, the teacher failed at the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC), which rejected his proposal to revoke the Health Ministry’s emergency measure as unfounded.
The SAC previously also ruled that the measure was non-discriminatory, because being vaccinated and not being vaccinated according to court decisions are not in the same position in terms of protection against coronavirus infection. The vice president of the association informed about filing a constitutional complaint in a press release Rozalio Dagmar Sláčalováassociation helps to file a complaint.
The court has been handling the complaint since last November. The size has changed in the meantime. However, during the period concerned, there is an exception to the obligation to wear mouth and nose protection for teachers who have completed vaccinations. According to the Ministry of Health, they are the least endangered group.
In early March, the NSS rejected the initiative of a teacher from Prague, when it failed, for example, on the grounds that the aim of the measure was to force unvaccinated teachers to be vaccinated. “Maintaining the obligation to wear respiratory protection for unvaccinated educators has a legitimate purpose other than to compel them to vaccinate voluntarily, and thus to protect them from infection.” said NS.
In the second half of March, according to Sláčalová, he rejected educators’ proposals to repeal the measure because it was manifestly unfounded. According to him, the court also refers to the previous decision on this action.
“It was clear from the court’s decision that he adhered to a superficial vaccination ideology. The unreasonable, unfounded and health harm of unvaccinated teachers cannot even be questioned, as the court refused to answer the petitioner’s arguments and refused to take any evidence. This is just a formal review, the purpose of which is to give freedom to the former ministry and to sanction the intimidation of those who are not vaccinated.“said the lawyer Susan Candigliotarepresenting the teacher in court.
According to Sláčalová, the plaintiffs, lawyers and association agreed to file a constitutional complaint. According to him, not only because there was no judicial review, but also because according to them, the situation could reoccur in the future.
“Certified bacon geek. Evil social media fanatic. Music practitioner. Communicator.”
