The paper analyzes a recent OVG (Oberverwaltungsgericht) Berlino-Brandeburgo’s ruling which established that a pharmacy director cannot refuse, on grounds of conscience, to dispense the “morning-after pill” considered potentially abortifacient, even if the refusal is religiously motivated, due to the legal obligations arising from their profession. In this way, the judgment fits into the broader debate concerning the legitimacy of a pharmacist’s right to conscientious objection with respect to the sale of emergency contraceptives, traditionally considered by legal doctrine as a “doubtful case” of conscientious objection. The article, therefore, questions the possibility of recognizing a pharmacist’s right to conscientious objection within the German legal system, reflecting on the principle of “praktische konkordanz”.
La contraccezione d’emergenza e l’obiezione di coscienza del farmacista. Note a OVG (Oberverwaltungsgericht) Berlino-Brandeburgo – Urteil 26 giugno 2024, 90 h 1/20
Salvatore Manzo
2024
Abstract
The paper analyzes a recent OVG (Oberverwaltungsgericht) Berlino-Brandeburgo’s ruling which established that a pharmacy director cannot refuse, on grounds of conscience, to dispense the “morning-after pill” considered potentially abortifacient, even if the refusal is religiously motivated, due to the legal obligations arising from their profession. In this way, the judgment fits into the broader debate concerning the legitimacy of a pharmacist’s right to conscientious objection with respect to the sale of emergency contraceptives, traditionally considered by legal doctrine as a “doubtful case” of conscientious objection. The article, therefore, questions the possibility of recognizing a pharmacist’s right to conscientious objection within the German legal system, reflecting on the principle of “praktische konkordanz”.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
