The La Serena court rejected three applications for protection against the Minister of Health.

The Court of Appeal of La Serena rejected three protection appeals filed against the Ministry of Health and the former holder of the wallet, over statements issued by the authority regarding the vaccination program against the emerging coronavirus (Covid-19) that citizens must have.

The provisions state that with regard to the illegality of the alleged act in these proceedings, it must first be taken into account that it is among the functions recognized by the Ministry of Health in Article 4 of DFL No. 1, 2005, which regulates, including Exercise supervision over the health sectorAnd the Dictate the general regulations related to technical, administrative and financial issues that must be adhered to by the entities and entities of the system, to carry out the activities of prevention, promotion, promotion, protection and recovery of patients’ health and rehabilitation.and function Conducting public health surveillance and assessing the health status of the population.

The decisions add that Article 7 of the same legal body indicates that the minister is recognized as having the power to dictate relevant regulations. In turn, the Health Law states (…) that the health authority is subordinate to the Minister of Health in matters that fall to the aforementioned Minister of State, and also thinks (…) of measures that can be adopted in case of outbreaks of epidemics or an increase in infectious diseases to prevent their spread and dealing with emergencies. Under this regulation, a health alert decree was issued, by Decree No. 4, issued by the Ministry of Health, published on February 8, 2020, and this state of alert was extended until December 2022.

For the Court of Appeal, therefore, actions taken by the health authority fall within the regulatory framework recognized by the current legal system, in particular by declaring a health alert currently governing the national territory, for the purpose of the emergency arising from the global outbreak of the virus.

The decision confirms that with regard to the data questioned in the appeal, taking into account the legal powers invested by the defendant and previously disclosed, it appears that the statements of the Minister of Health, in terms of knowing the background of people who have not undergone the process of vaccination against COVID 19, cannot be considered responsible for any action that is unlawful or arbitrary, or that in some way unduly threatens the constitutional guarantees of the plaintiff, by framing them within compliance with the public functions entrusted by the legal system to the Ministry of Health.

Following the rulings, Minister Felipe Polgar explained that various protection requests had been made to this court by some individuals who felt threatened in the legitimate exercise of their right to personal equality and equality before the law, in connection with some of the statements made by the former. The Minister of Health, Yarza, was to be issued. This court considered, on the one hand, that the aforementioned announcement does not constitute an administrative procedure in light of Article 3 of Law 10980, but rather conforms to a ruling issued in the context of a vaccination campaign carried out by the Ministry in charge of the former minister who worked with the standards of clinical specialization.

She added that, on the other hand, the statement in this court’s ruling cannot be considered an arbitrary or illegal act, because the behavior conforms to a technical standard according to the guidelines of the Ministry of Health, and cannot be formed. In itself an act that denies, disturbs, or threatens the legitimate exercise of the rights alluded to by the appellants.

See provisions Rol N° 6060-2022, Rol N° 6075-2022 and Rol N° 6079-2022.