Updated 07/25/2021 5:19 PM
A scenario that is not within the
"possible" which is in reality: a vaccine is approved against the coronavirus, signed
a contract for two doses
of this formula, you pay in advance, the first doses are applied,
is they differ to three months instead of the 21 days
of the trial published in the scientific journal
100 days pass and the second doses
do not appear
nearly 7 million people
waiting to complete the Russian vaccine schedule.
That is the "Russian" scenario of vaccination with Sputnik V in Argentina.
What if something happened that - because of the government's airy letter to Russia - no one can rule out?
If the second doses take even longer?
If they do not arrive,
could the State be sued for the delay in full immunization?
And could it result in a conviction?
The question revolves around social networks, then of course, from the claim of those who do not feel the second prick and fear the third wave of infections by the Delta variant.
interviewed experts in Law and Bioethics to put infectology aside and respond, from the legal point of view, to a question so retweeted.
An "illustrative" judgment
Consider a courtroom.
There are protagonists who could be singled out as "accused": the laboratories and the Government.
But you have to think of it, in reality, as a "State", because, before any management of the pandemic, it was in Deputies where the law that enabled favorable contracts for pharmaceutical companies began.
And also, imaginatively, there is the "quarrel": the people who have
already put his shoulder to the first dose
A box of Sputnik vaccines applied in Technopolis.
Photo Andrés D'Elía
That the scene above occurs and exceeds the limits of a paragraph or an "illustrative" judgment, in itself,
is less likely
that the second component of Sputnik V will begin to rain. This is what the constitutional lawyer
Andrés Gil Dominguez
"You cannot make a judgment.
There is no contract signed between the people and the State
. There is no true damage credited for not receiving the second dose on time. The State is not a total producer of the vaccine. It is still possible to reach one heterologous vaccine formula (due to the
of brands) ", he tells
But, in his response, suddenly, the fictional room of that unlikely court, begins to rearm.
"Actually you can make a judgment but
the possibility of success is nil,
" he warns.
What would the accusation be?
"Lawsuit for damages or action of protection by omission", points out the expert in Law.
"I do not know what they would claim from the State, but to the above I would add another point: that
with a dose the percentage of immunity is high
Always imagining fictitious scenarios, the Anmat - which has an agreement with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) - could recommend, just before the trial began, the combination of vaccines to
the lack of the second component of Sputnik
First, they would have to approve the Russian vaccine in the European Community, which is still under analysis.
There are 7 million people who did not receive the second dose of Sputnik V. Photo Andrés D'Elía
The Ministry of Health of the City, as Jorge Gefner, professor of Immunology and researcher at Conicet, announced "in two or three weeks" the
results of the study with 5 thousand volunteers
where the combination was tested to make up for the lack of Adenovirus 5, the second Russian injection.
The Ministry of Health of the Nation, who is the one who would have to administer the guidelines in the event that post-mixing effectiveness is demonstrated,
could approve the combination
beyond that jurisdiction.
In all the country.
What about from Bioethics?
What about the lawsuits of eventual victims who claim to have entrusted their shoulders to the first dose of a vaccine
because they were assured of the second dose
is a lawyer, a member of the Board of Directors of the Unesco Bioethics Network and an important member of the Ethics and Human Rights Committee in the Covid-19 Pandemic, which advises the Government.
Like Gil Domínguez, he does not believe it is "feasible" for the State to be sued for this cause.
"It is something global, not typical of Argentina. In any case, there may be responsibility of the vaccine producers (Argentina participates in the Sputnik process, through the Richmond laboratory), but not of the State," he explains.
Ignacio Maglio, member of the Ethics and Human Rights Committee in the Covid-19 Pandemic.
Photo Lucia Merle
For what is known in law as "force majeure" or "fortuitous event".
That event that could not be foreseen or that still could not be avoided.
"That operates as a surplus of responsibility for the state," he marks.
There is a recent example that could explain why
the State could be condemned for another vaccine
and why it could not be this way with the covid vaccines.
On December 26, 2019, the Federal Administrative Court of Appeals confirmed the judgment of first instance, as well as the decision of the Access to Public Information Agency, which ordered the State to make public all the information related to the suspension of meningococcal vaccine at 11 years of age.
"The State was blamed
for not reporting on the reasons for the suspension
of that vaccine, something quite different from later blaming the State for the non-application of that vaccine. And that could happen, because there the primary responsibility lies with the State, that he did not give the vaccine. With the Covid, it is the
that breaches the contract by not giving them, "Maglio closes.
Before all the above, the clear thing is that Russia assures that it will comply with the delivery of all the vaccines committed to Argentina, but that
the priority is to supply its country
Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov said so.
They affirmed that they are in contact with the Government of Alberto Fernández to solve the problem.
The option to the deficit of Sputnik V: the results of the studies to combine it will be in August
Russia assures that it will comply with the delivery of vaccines to Argentina, but that the priority is to supply its country
After the controversy over Nicolini's letter, the Russian Fund and the Government made a joint statement