Informed on August 12, 2021 by a letter sent by the inter-municipal hospital of Toulon / La Seyne (CHITS) of the obligation to justify from September 15 to having received at least one dose of vaccine and, from October 15 , to present a complete vaccination schedule, Stéphanie B. intends to assert her choice not to be vaccinated while continuing her professional activity.
No more access to his job and a suspended salary
Faced with the vaccination obligation imposed by the law of August 5, 2021 on certain categories of people, including those working in a hospital establishment, this Hyéroise affected as an administrative agent at the hospital of Hyères, decided to appeal to the court administration of Toulon, this Monday, September 13, for “infringement of the fundamental freedom to work” but also in view of the “free and informed consent” which she considers flouted.
On his behalf, Me Didier Hollet, lawyer at the Toulon Bar, brought an interim action before the administrative court, so that the court can rule within 48 hours on his request.. “As of this Wednesday, September 15, my client who does not wish to be vaccinated will no longer have access to her workstation and she has been notified by a bailiff that she is subject to a temporary suspension of her work. processing“, says the board.
Opposed to compulsory vaccination, “the administrative agent will find herself in a particularly complicated situation, not to say untenable, since either she is vaccinated or she is prohibited from working and she will suffer very significant financial consequences since in reality she will not be entitled to treatment in the absence of service“, explains Me Hollet.
What is denounced
This application for interim relief, Me Didier Hollet justifies it by three conditions. The first is the serious interference caused by the administration on a fundamental freedom.
According to the arguments developed in the request, the freedom to come and go is violated and the principle of equal treatment between people is called into question by imposing a vaccination obligation on certain categories of citizens.
Second argument: the clearly illegal infringement. The lawyer here raises the question of whether it is legally possible to make anti-covid vaccination compulsory.
He is reporting a vaccine to the state, he said, “experimental“. He notes, for example, that for the Pfizer vaccine, the marketing authorization was granted on December 21, 2020 until December 2022 and that the final report of the clinical study will be submitted in December 2023.
Lack of consent
The lawyer from the Var continues: “this vaccination obligation is obviously prejudicial to the principle of consent as soon as the clinical test phases have not been completed“.
Finally, he considers that insofar as refractory or unwilling people expose themselves to financial consequences, comparable to a disciplinary sanction, the procedure for suspension of work and salary should be adversarial.
“The officer should be able to present his arguments on the matter. THEhe law of 5 August 2021 is therefore completely unconstitutional.“
The response is expected later this week.
–
