The National Ethics Commission (CNE) believes that in all cases, positive discrimination measures in favour of vaccinated and recovered persons are perfectly reasonable.

The commission is supportive of the implementation of passive or indirect obligations to vaccinate, such as restrictive measures on the unvaccinated, in accordance with the principles of non-maleficence (not inflicting harm on others) and beneficence (doing good, active kindness).

While it is clear that vaccination against the coronavirus is not the only means of fighting the pandemic, the CNE believes that vaccination of the greatest number of people is the most appropriate ally in the fight to maintain public health and, as there is no alternative at present, it is therefore unavoidable. The CNE say that the pandemic can only be definitively stopped when everyone is vaccinated, cured or dead. No one will be able to evade this macabre choice.

Given the current stagnation of the vaccination rate, it also seems obvious to the CNE that additional measures, such as those announced by the government on 29 November, will have to be implemented, even at the cost of increasing the pressure on those who have not yet been vaccinated. Moreover, the CNE claim there is a silent majority of those who have been vaccinated, who are opposed to the growing aggressiveness of a noisy anti-vaccination minority.

Read also: Violent anti-vaxxers make up a small minority of society, says professor

According to the CNE, the tightening of restrictions to the detriment of the unvaccinated and uncured is indeed, for the time being, a way of imposing an indirect or passive obligation to get vaccinated.

In the longer term, if the health situation stabilises or even worsens,  the CNE think that an active or direct vaccination mandate would be appropriate and justifiable by the same ethical, social, economic and health arguments as those set out for passive or indirect vaccination.

Read also: Austria to impose lockdown for all, mandatory vaccinations

Indeed, for a majority of the members of the CNE, based on ethical arguments and taking into account the scientific data available to date, the societal and political choice of compulsory vaccination for all is an option worth considering, provided that everyone has been able to choose individually to be vaccinated before such a measure comes into force.

In other words, the CNE is of the opinion that an ethically argued, democratically decided and legally supervised vaccination obligation for adults is perfectly justifiable.