Vaccine Hesitancy

The Fight against Misinformation in the Digital Society

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2022.6.1.280

Keywords:

vaccine hesitancy, mandatory vaccinations, constitutional legitimacy, personal freedom and self-determination, misinformation, algorithm society, fake news, populism, mistrust, constitutional law

Abstract

The contestations arising from the introduction in various European countries of mandatory vaccination against Covid-19 for certain categories of workers are expressions of a profound malaise, not new and common to Western societies. Misinformation about vaccines is not a new phenomenon, but has been heightened due to the rise of social media, clearly evident during the Covid-19 emergency. These conflicts have a significant social impact and can hinder the struggle against the spread of the virus. This work analyses the origins and legal implications of this growing social mistrust in science, which jeopardises the stability of the constitutional order, founded on the principles of trust and solidarity.

Author Biography

Valeria de Santis, Parthenope University of Naples

Researcher of Public Law
Law Department
University of Naples ‘Parthenope’
Via Generale Parisi n. 13,
80133 Napoli; Italy.
valeria.desantis@uniparthenope.it

References

Ali K. A. and Pastore Celentano L. (2017). Addressing vaccine hesitancy in the ‘Post-Truth’ era. Eurohealth, 23(4), 16-20. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/332615 (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Byrnes S. and Collins C. (2017). The Equity Crisis: The True Costs of Extractive Capitalism. In: Lerch D. (ed.), The Community Resilience Reader: Essential Resources for an Era of Upheaval. Washington, DC: Island Press, ISBN: 9781610919302.

Camilleri F. (2019). Compulsory vaccinations for children: Balancing the competing human rights at stake. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 37 (3), 245-267, https://doi.org/10.1177/0924051919861797

Canepa A. (2021). Prove tecniche di sopravvivenza dell’ordinamento costituzionale. Il Supremo Tribunale Federale brasiliano e le multiformi problematiche della pandemia. Corti Supreme e Salute, 3, 559-585. http://www.cortisupremeesalute.it/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Canepa-1.pdf (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Cascini F., Pantovic A., Al-Ajlouni Y., Failla G. and Ricciardi W. (2021). Attitudes, acceptance and hesitancy among the general population worldwide to receive the COVID-19 vaccines and their contributing factors: A systematic review. EClinicalMedicine, 40, 1-14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101113

Ceccherini E. and Rodriguez S. (2020). Fake news e vaccini: le verità nascoste. Federalismi.it, 11, 150-187. Available at: https://www.federalismi.it/nv14/articolo-documento.cfm?Artid=42118 (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Cohen J. E. (2019). Between Truth and Power. The Legal Constructions of Informational Capitalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, DOI:10.1093/oso/9780190246693.001.0001

Communication from the Commission, to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Tackling online disinformation: a European Approach, Brussels, COM(2018) 236 final, 26 April 2018.

Council of the European Union. Conclusions on strengthening resilience and countering hybrid threats, including disinformation in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Doc. No. 14064/20, 15 December 2020. Available at: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14064-2020-INIT/en/pdf (accessed on 31.05.2022).

D’ambrosio C. and Menta G. (2021). L’identikit dei no-vax, 29 September 2021. Available at: https://www.lavoce.info/archives/89893/identikit-dei-no-vax/ (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, OJ L 311, 28 November 2001.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). ECDC launches the report 'Countering online vaccine misinformation in the EU/EEA'. June 29, 2021. Countering online vaccine misinformation the EU/EEA, Stockholm, ECDC, June 2021. Available at: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/news-events/ecdc-launches-report-countering-online-vaccine-misinformation-eueea (accessed on 31.05.2022).

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Countering online vaccine misinformation in the EU/EEA. Stockholm: ECDC, 2021. Available at: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/countering-online-vaccine-misinformation-eu-eea (accessed on 31.05.2022).

European Commission Guidance on Strengthening the Code of Practice on Disinformation, COM (2021) 262 final, 26 May 2021.

European Data Protection Supervisor. Opinion 3/2018 on online manipulation and personal data. 19 March 2018. Available at: https://edps.europa.eu/sites/edp/files/publication/18-03-19_online_manipulation_en.pdf (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Franchi J. (2021). Fact-checking, chi controlla i controllori? Anomalie, dubbi e conflitti d’interesse, in Agendadigitale.eu. Available at: https://www.agendadigitale.eu/cultura-digitale/fact-checking-chi-controlla-i-controllori-anomalie-dubbi-e-conflitti-dinteresse (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Frosini T.E. (2016). Costituzionalismo 2.0. Rassegna parlamentare, 4, 673-694.

Harris T. (2021). United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law, Algorithms and Amplification: How Social Media Platforms’ Design Choices Shape Our Discourse and Our Minds, April 27, 2021. Available at: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/algorithms-and-amplification-how-social-media-platforms-design-choices-shape-our-discourse-and-our-minds (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Italian Regulatory Communications Authority (2020). Report on online disinformation. Special Issue on Coronavirus, No. 3. Available at: https://www.agcom.it/osservatorio-sulla-disinformazione-online (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Kata A. (2010). A postmodern Pandora’s box: anti-vaccination misinformation on the Internet. Vaccine, 28(7), 1709-1716, DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.12.022

Kennedy J. (2019). Populist politics and vaccine hesitancy in Western Europe: an analysis of national-level data. The European Journal of Public Health, 29 (3), 512-516, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckz004

Krasser A. (2021). Compulsory Vaccination in a Fundamental Rights Perspective: Lessons from the ECtHR. International Constitutional Law Journal, 15 (2), 207-233, https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2021-0010

King, J., Motta Ferraz, O. L. et al. (2021). Legal, Constitutional, and Ethical Principles for Mandatory Vaccination Requirements for Covid-19. 1 November 2021. Available at: https://lexatlas-c19.org/vaccination-principles/ (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Lasco G. (2020). Medical populism and the COVID-19 pandemic. Global Public Health, 15(10), 1417-1429. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2020.1807581

Lévinas E. (1985). La traccia dell’altro. Napoli: Pironti.

Liberali B. (2021). Vaccinazioni contro il Covid-19: obbligo e nuove forme di obiezione di coscienza? Diritticomparati.it, 15 April 2021. Available at: https://www.diritticomparati.it/vaccinazioni-contro-il-covid-19-obbligo-e-nuove-forme-di-obiezione-di-coscienza/ (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Martuccelli D. (2002). Grammaires de l’individu. Paris: Gallimard, https://doi.org/10.4000/sdt.29989

Massa Pinto I. (2020). Il diritto costituzionale di fronte all’emergenza CoVID-19: la costituzione in senso funzionale e la (in)consapevolezza delle tendenze autodistruttive del sistema. Lo Stato, 14, 315-329. Available at: https://www.mucchieditore.it/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&view=productdetails&virtuemart_product_id=3084 (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Mchangama J. and Alkiviadou N. (2021). Hate Speech and the European Court of Human Rights: Whatever Happened to the Right to Offend, Shock or Disturb?. Human Rights Law Review, 21(4), 1008-1042, https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngab015

Mesch G. S. and Schwirian K. P. (2015). Social and political determinants of vaccine hesitancy: Lessons learned from the H1N1 pandemic of 2009-2010. American Journal of Infection Control, 43(11), 1161-1165, DOI:10.1016/j.ajic.2015.06.031

Monti M. (2017). Fake news e social network: la verità ai tempi di Facebook. MediaLaws, 1, 79-90. Available at: https://www.medialaws.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/8.-Monti.pdf (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Monti M. (2017). Regolazione, Internet e tecnica: le implicazioni di motori di ricerca e social networks sulla libertà di informazione. Federalismi.it, 24. Available at: https://www.federalismi.it/nv14/articolo-documento.cfm?Artid=35322&content=Le+impl (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Morozov E. (2013). To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism. New York: PublicAffairs, ISBN: 9781610391382.

Nilsson A. (2021). Is Compulsory Childhood Vaccination Compatible with the Right to Respect for Private Life? A Comment on Vavřička and Others v. the Czech Republic. European Journal of Health Law, 28(3), 323-340, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718093-bja10048

Ó Fathaigh R., Helberger N. and Appelman N. (2021). The perils of legally defining disinformation. Internet Policy Review, 10(4), DOI: https://doi.org/10.14763/2021.4.1584

Pagano G. (2019). Il Code of Practice on Disinformation. Note sulla natura giuridica di un atto misto di autoregolazione. Federalismi.it, 11. Available at: https://www.federalismi.it/nv14/articolo-documento.cfm?Artid=38723 (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Panagopoulou F. (2021). Mandatory Vaccination during the Period of a Pandemic: Legal and Ethical Considerations in Europe. BioTech, 10(29), 1-14, https://doi.org/10.3390/biotech10040029

Pariser E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. New York: Penguin Group, ISBN:978-1-59420-300-8.

Pinelli C. (2021). “Diritto ad essere se stessi” e “pieno sviluppo della persona umana”. Rivista Aic, 4, 309-328. Available at: https://www.rivistaaic.it/images/rivista/pdf/4_2021_13_Pinelli.pdf (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Pitruzzella G. (2018). La libertà di informazione nell’era di Internet. Media Laws, 1, 19-47. Available at: https://www.medialaws.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/1.-Pitruzzella.pdf (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Pollicino O. (2020). Freedom of Expression and the European Approach to Disinformation and Hate Speech: The Implication of the Technological Factor, Liber Amicorum per Pasquale Costanzo, 209-229, Available at: https://www.giurcost.org/contents/giurcost//COLLANA/1.pdf (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Pollicino O. and De Gregorio G. (2021). Constitutional Law in the Algorithmic Society. In: Micklitz H.W., Pollicino O., Reichman A., Simoncini A. and Di Gregorio G. (Eds.), Constitutional Challenges in the Algorithmic Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108914857

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC, COM(2020) 825 final, 15 December 2020.

Puppinck G. (2017). Conscientious Objection and Human Rights: A Systematic Analysis. Law and Religion, 1(1), 1-75, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/24682993-12340001

Reckwitz A. (2020). The Society of Singularities. In: Bachmann-Medick D., Kugele J., Nünning A. (Eds.), Futures of the Study of Culture: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Global Challenges. Berlin: De Gruyter, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110669398

Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency, OJ L 136, 30 April 2004.

Saling L.L., Mallal D., Scholer F., Skelton R., and Spina D. (2021). No one is immune to misinformation: An investigation of misinformation sharing by subscribers to a fact-checking newsletter, PLoS ONE, 16 (8), 1-13, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255702

Sallam M. (2021). COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Worldwide: A Concise Systematic Review of Vaccine Acceptance Rates. Vaccines, 9(2), 1-14, https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9020160

Salmon D.A. et al. (2006). Compulsory vaccination and conscientious or philosophical exemptions: past, present, and future. The Lancet, 367 (9508), 436-442, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68144-0

Simoncini A. (2019). L’algoritmo incostituzionale: intelligenza artificiale e il futuro delle libertà. BioLaw Journal, 1, 63-89, DOI: https://doi.org/10.15168/2284-4503-20191

Susser D., Roessler B. and Nissenbaum H. (2019). Technology, autonomy, and manipulation. Internet Policy Review, 8(2), DOI: 10.14763/2019.2.1410

Tomasi M. (2021). La proporzionalità degli obblighi vaccinali nella lettura della Corte Edu. Quaderni costituzionali, 2, 445-448.

Van der Linden S., Roozenbeek J. and Compton J. (2020). Inoculating Against Fake News About COVID-19. Front. Phycol., 11, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.566790

Veronesi P. (2021). L’eccezione alla regola: il caso dei trattamenti sanitari obbligatori. Osservatorioaic.it, 6, 226-252. Available at: https://www.osservatorioaic.it/images/rivista/pdf/2021_6_06_Veronesi.pdf (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Vinceti S. R. (2021). Covid-19 Compulsory Vaccination and the European Court of Human Rights. Acta Biomed, 92(S6), DOI: 10.23750/abm.v92iS6.12333

WHO. Global Vaccine Action Plan of 2013. Available at: https://www.who.int/teams/immunization-vaccines-and-biologicals/strategies/global-vaccine-action-plan (accessed on 31.05.2022).

WHO. Ten threats to global health in 2019. February 1, 2019. Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/spotlight/ten-threats-to-global-health-in-2019 (accessed on 31.05.2022).

Brazil, Supreme Federal Tribunal, ADI 6.586 and 6.587 (17 December 2020)

Czechia, Constitutional Court of The Czech Republic, case No. Pl. ÚS 19/14 (27 January 2015)

ECtHR, Matter v. Slovakia, app. No. 31534/96, 5 July 1999

ECtHR, Pretty v. the United Kingdom, app. No. 2346/02, 29 April 2002

ECtHR, Salvetti v. Italy, app. No. 42197/98, 9 July 2002

ECtHR, Solomakhin v. Ukraine, app. No. 24429/03, 15 march 2012

ECtHR, Hristozov and others v. Bulgaria, app. No. 47039/11 and 358/12, 13 November 2012

ECtHR, Vavřička and others v. Czech Republic, app. No. 47621/13, 8 April 2021

ECtHR, Abgrall and 671 others v. France, app. No. 41950/21, 24 August 2021

ECtHR, Kakaletri and others v. Greece, app. No. 43375/21, 9 September 2021

ECtHR, Theofanopoulou and others v. Greece, app. No. 43910/21, 9 September 2021

European Commission of Human Rights, Boffa and others v. San Marino, app. No. 26536/95, 15 January 1998

France, Constitutional Council, dec. QPC No. 458-2015 (20 March 2015)

France, Constitutional Council, Decision No. 2021-824 DC (5 August 2021)

France, Court of Cassation, No. 10-27.888 30 (11 July 2012)

France, State Council, Association liberté information santé, No. 222741 (26 November 2001)

Hungary, Constitutional Court, dec. No. 39/2007 (20 June 2007)

Italy, Constitutional Court, dec. No. 75 del 1992 (17 February 1992)

Italy, Constitutional Court, sent. No. 107/2012 (16 April 2012)

Italy, Constitutional Court, sent. No. 5/2018 (24 January 2018)

Italy, Council of State, III, sent. No. 7045 (20 October 2021)

USA, Supreme Court of the United States, Dr. A, et al. v. Kathy Hochul, Governor of New York, 595 U.S. (13 December 2021)

Downloads

Published

30-06-2022

How to Cite

de Santis, V. (2022). Vaccine Hesitancy: The Fight against Misinformation in the Digital Society. Bratislava Law Review, 6(1), 31–50. https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2022.6.1.280