A military officer failed to convince Europe’s highest court that Italy’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for military members discriminated against military members because the mandate didn’t also apply to civilian employees.
The officer, identified by the initials B.G., served in Italy’s Army Engineer Corps. He was suspended without pay in January 2022 for refusing to comply with the mandate.
Earlier this month, the European Court of Justice ruled that opposition to vaccine mandates based on policy disagreement, rather than sincerely held belief, is not protected under European Union (EU) anti-discrimination law.
B.G. challenged his suspension, arguing that regular COVID-19 tests were an acceptable alternative to compulsory vaccination and that workers in other sectors were given this choice.
Italy’s Constitutional Court ruled against him, finding that the military vaccine mandate was an appropriate measure for military personnel.
On appeal, Italy’s Council of State, the country’s highest administrative appeals court, asked the European Court of Justice to clarify several legal questions.
The European Court of Justice found that B.G. did not demonstrate a sincerely held religious, spiritual or philosophical belief protected under EU law.
“Judges found BG was not expressing a protected religious, philosophical or spiritual belief but challenging Italy’s public health policy,” Courthouse News reported. His objections “focused on vaccine effectiveness, possible side effects, testing as an alternative and the way the mandate was implemented.”
In its ruling, the European Court of Justice wrote that B.G. “does not seek to oppose the compulsory vaccination at issue in the main proceedings on the basis of his own beliefs, but to challenge, as such, the choices made by the Italian authorities in the field of public health.”
Those objections “constitute opinions” on public health, and as such, are not protected. Aside from sincerely held beliefs, EU law also protects against discrimination based on age, disability or sexual orientation.
Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst called the ruling “unfortunate and disappointing,” as the legal protection of personal beliefs in the EU “appears to be an empty shell.”
Hellbound and Down 