Researchers contend that mandatory vaccinations do not violate human rights

Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

Researchers from The Dickson Poon School of Law, King's College London, and UCL, argue that vaccination mandates should not be seen as necessarily unethical or in conflict with human rights, in a new article published in The Lancet.

In the article, Professor Octavio Ferraz, Co-Director of the Transnational Law Institute, and Professor Jeff King and Dr. Andrew Jones from UCL, make the case that where a mandatory vaccination scheme aims in part or whole to reduce harm to others, there is a compelling rights-based case for a state duty to consider adopting mandates and that such laws do not violate any general right to liberty.

However, the team maintains that a careful approach needs to be taken by those enforcing vaccine mandate schemes. The article includes a range of recommendations for the creation of such schemes, and emphasizes the importance of including a consultation period when drafting bills.

The researchers make their case based on extensive discussion and analysis held as part of the Lex-Atlas: COVID-19 (LAC19) project, an open-access resource providing scholarly report and analysis of national legal responses to COVID-19 around the world. Lex-Atlas: COVID-19 is led by Professor Octavio Ferraz and Professor Jeff King.

More information: Jeff King et al, Mandatory COVID-19 vaccination and human rights, The Lancet (2021). DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02873-7

Journal information: The Lancet
Citation: Researchers contend that mandatory vaccinations do not violate human rights (2022, January 6) retrieved 13 July 2024 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Explore further

Study examines attitudes to vaccine mandates


Feedback to editors