Панкевич Наталья Владимировна – кандидат политических наук, старший научный сотрудник,
620066, г. Екатеринбург, ул. С. Ковалевской, 16
Natalia V. Pankevich – PhD in Political Sciences, Senior Researcher,
16, S. Kovalevskoi ul., Yekaterinburg, 620066
Руденко Валентина Викторовна – кандидат юридических наук, старший научный сотрудник,
620066, г. Екатеринбург, ул. С. Ковалевской, 16
Valentina V. Rudenko – PhD in Law, Senior Researcher,
16, S. Kovalevskoi ul., Yekaterinburg, 620066
Предметом исследования являются вопросы правового регулирования мероприятий по вакцинации от COVID-19 в контексте национальной безопасности Российской Федерации, а также взаимодействие граждан и государства в обеспечении эпидемиологической безопасности. Целью статьи является поиск наилучших практик по вопросам необходимости и определения пределов возможности внедрения правового института обязательной вакцинации и содействия правовыми методами участию населения в программах вакцинации с целью достижения максимально возможного охвата граждан Российской Федерации. Методологическую основу статьи составляет междисциплинарный комплексный подход, сочетающий формально-юридический метод и сравнительный анализ правовых актов и судебных решений с научными выводами из социологии, политологии, медицины, биоэтики. Статья посвящена международным и национальным стандартам регулирования вакцинации средствами публичного и частного права в целях достижения коллективного иммунитета. Выделены основные направления совершенствования правового регулирования вакцинации в России: установление адекватной системы учета и распределения индивидуальных рисков, а также справедливое возмещение возможного ущерба при вакцинации; преодоление информационной асимметрии в ситуации индивидуального принятия решений с целью снижения дефицита достоверных данных и обеспечения эффективной коммуникации внутри экспертного сообщества, государства и личности.
The subject. Having a proven positive social and economic effect, vaccination remains one of the most important institutions in the system of public safety. The development of this institution requires a rational legal support, considering not only current epidemic process, but also potential threats of bioterrorism and the development of biological weapons. In this light, effective legal regulation of vaccination measures, determination of their desirable forms and scope of the population coverage, as well as cooperation between citizens and the State in ensuring epidemiological safety become a matter of paramount importance.
The purpose. The authors propose to discuss two issues: the limits of the possibility of introducing the institution of mandatory vaccination and the issue of legal assistance for the population to participate in vaccination programs in order to achieve the maximum possible coverage.
The methodology. The article employs a comprehensive approach which combines formal interpretation and comparative analysis of legal acts and courts decisions with the insights from sociology, behavioral sciences and discourse analysis. The article focuses on the international and national standards of regulation of the vaccination by the means of public and private law in order to achieve herd immunity.
Our analysis of the vaccination institute place in the legal system demonstrates that this institution can be included in a row of disciplinary, coercive and binding institutions for citizens prescribing mandatory participation. However, its coercive potential is relatively small and is limited to certain segments of the society that are of strategic importance for ensuring the epidemiological safety. The article posits that such groups remain in the legal field of exceptions, whereas in general, the vaccination institute presumes that the mandatory component is prescribed primarily to the state, not the citizens. And therefore, the citizen's participation in vaccination has the character of an individual rational choice.
Conclusions. Our analysis shows that the law on vaccination should be focused on the facilitating socially desirable individual choice rather than binding norm prescription. In this area, the main tasks of legal regulation are establishment of an adequate system of accounting and distribution of individual risks, as well as fair compensation for possible damages during vaccinations. The second main direction of legal development is overcoming information asymmetry in the situation of individual decision-making in order to reduce the shortage of reliable data and to ensure effective communication within an expert community, the state and the person. We propose that this development contributes to the transformation of a purely legal norm on vaccination into a social and cultural one and strengthens the cooperative strategies of citizens in the fight against vaccine-controlled diseases.
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.