German Infection Protection Act

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Basic data
Title: Law for the Prevention and Control
of Infectious Diseases in Humans
Short title: German Infection Protection Act
Abbreviation: IfSG
Type: Federal law
Scope: Federal Republic of Germany
Legal matter: Special administrative law
References : 2126-13
Issued on: July 20, 2000
( BGBl. I p. 1045 )
Entry into force on: January 1, 2001
Last change by: Art. 5 G of June 19, 2020
( Federal Law Gazette I pp. 1385, 1386 )
Effective date of the
last change:
March 30, 2020
(Art. 6 G of June 19, 2020)
GESTA : D058
Weblink: Text of the law
Please note the note on the applicable legal version.

The German Infection Protection Act ( IfSG ) has been regulating the legal obligations to prevent and combat infectious diseases in humans since January 1, 2001 . The purpose of the law is to prevent communicable diseases, detect infections at an early stage and prevent them from spreading ( Section 1 (1) IfSG). It is irrelevant what type of infection is and how the infection can occur.

Essentially, the law regulates infection protection as a special area of danger prevention , i.e. it belongs to the field of police law ; this is part of the special administrative law . It is generally recognized that the principles of police law apply in addition (such as proportionality , discretion , selection of the use of interferers or non-interferers - police obligation ).

For measures against publicly dangerous or communicable diseases in humans and animals there is a competing legislative competence according to Art. 74 Abs. 1 Nr. 19 GG . According to Article 72, Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law, the Federal Government has made use of its legislative competence with the Infection Protection Act. The prevention of animal diseases and their control is regulated in the Animal Health Act ( § 1 TierGesG).

Article 74, Paragraph 1, No. 19 of the Basic Law also empowers the federal government to issue further statutory provisions on prevention such as vaccinations, preventive medical check-ups, reporting obligations or keeping cancer registers, but does not establish comprehensive legislative competence in the area of ​​health care.

For the purpose of preventing and combating communicable diseases, the Infection Protection Act itself, through individual measures to which it authorizes authorities, or through statutory ordinances based on the IfSG, the basic rights of physical integrity , freedom of the person , freedom of movement , freedom of assembly , letter and postal secrecy and the inviolability of the apartment are restricted and a professional activity ban is imposed.

history

The IfSG was passed by the German Bundestag with the consent of the Bundesrat on July 20, 2000 as Article 1 of the Act on the Reorganization of Disease Law Regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) and came into force on January 1, 2001.

At the same time acc. Art. 5 para. 1 SeuchRNeuG the following laws and ordinances are no longer in force :

  1. Federal Disease Act
  2. Venereal Disease Control Act
  3. Ordinance on the reporting obligation for positive HIV confirmation tests (laboratory report ordinance )
  4. Ordinance on the extension of the reporting requirement to human spongiform encephalopathies
  5. First regulation to implement the law to combat sexually transmitted diseases
  6. Second regulation implementing the law to combat sexually transmitted diseases
  7. Ordinance on the extension of the reporting obligation according to Section 3 of the Federal Disease Act to include enteropathic haemolytic-uraemic syndrome (HUS) and infection by enterohaemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC)

The law reacted to the results of the investigation committee of the German Bundestag " HIV infections through blood and blood products " and set the EU directive on the quality of water for human consumption as well as the decision of the European Parliament and the council on the creation of a network for to implement epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases in the community. It institutionalized the Robert Koch Institute as an epidemiological center instead of the Federal Health Office , which was dissolved in 1994, and combined the repealed laws and ordinances into a uniform set of rules.

After the success of post-war epidemics such as typhus , dysentery , epidemic hepatitis A or polio and tuberculosis , the fight against infectious diseases in the German health system had taken a back seat. The occurrence of AIDS and BSE , the increase in multi-resistant pathogens in hospitals and fears of other pathogens that have not yet been discovered or are known, but whose virulence and resistance behavior has changed, have rekindled public and scientific interest in infection-epidemiological issues in the 1980s . At the same time, in 1994 the Bundestag committee of inquiry uncovered existing structural deficits in the reporting system and in risk management in the early detection of communicable diseases, which had led to preventable HIV infections via blood and blood products. In addition to the passing of the Transfusion Act in 1998, the legislature therefore saw a need for action to prevent communicable diseases by reviving the classic fields of activity of the public health service . The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention served as a model .

content

Purpose of the law, definitions

Section 1 contains the definition of the purpose of the law ( Section 1 (1) IfSG), definitions ( Section 2 IfSG) and the cooperation between federal, state and municipal authorities, doctors, veterinarians, hospitals, scientific institutions and other parties involved such as Food companies, health facilities and individuals in the prevention and control of communicable diseases ( Section 1 (2) IfSG).

The purpose of the law is to prevent communicable diseases in humans, to detect infections at an early stage and to prevent their spread. Communicable diseases are diseases caused by pathogens or their toxic products that are transmitted directly or indirectly to humans. Infection means the ingestion of a pathogen and its subsequent development or multiplication in the human organism.

Epidemic situation of national concern

A legal definition of this term does not exist. From the explanatory memorandum of the law, however, what is meant is the nationwide epidemic caused by the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, which cannot be countered at state level to a limited extent.

Authorization to issue ordinances

With effect from March 28, 2020, the law for the protection of the population in the event of an epidemic situation of national scope came into force, with which, among other things, the Infection Protection Act was changed. According to Section 5 (1) IfSG new version, the German Bundestag can determine “an epidemic situation of national scope” and repeal it if the conditions for its determination no longer exist.

With effect from March 28, 2020, the German Bundestag accepted the resolution recommendation of the Health Committee and determined an epidemic situation of national importance due to the spread of the new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in Germany at the time. The determination was unlimited.

With Section 5 (2) No. 1–10 IfSG new version, the Federal Ministry of Health received extensive statutory rights in the context of the epidemic situation of national scope, which relates to entry regulations, transport conditions in cross-border travel, such as data processing for the identification of a person or for the early detection of sick people, Disease suspects, contagion suspects and people who drop out, infection protection at certain facilities, companies and employees as well as certain measures to ensure the supply of pharmaceuticals, to maintain health care in outpatient practices, nursing care in outpatient and inpatient care facilities and finally regulations that differ from the professional laws of the health professions such as elderly or health and nursing staff. The ordinances issued on the basis of the new authorization remain in force until the epidemic situation of national scope is repealed, but at the latest until the end of March 31, 2021 or March 31, 2022 ( Section 5 (4) IfSG new version). In order to restore the legislature's legislative competence, parts of the politicians have been calling for the repeal to do so since mid-June 2020. The epidemic can now be countered to a limited extent at the state level.

coordination

A general administrative regulation of the federal government coordinated the exchange of information between the federal and state governments in epidemically significant cases until March 27, 2020 (Section 5 IfSG old version). One use case was the federal-state agreement of March 16, 2020 on guidelines against the spread of the coronavirus .

Since March 28, 2020, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) has been coordinating the cooperation between the states and between the states and the federal government as well as other authorities and agencies involved in the event of an epidemic situation of national scope ( Section 5 (7) IfSG new version) . Its importance in the prevention and control of nationwide epidemics has thus increased.

The RKI is the national authority for the prevention of communicable diseases as well as for the early detection and prevention of the further spread of infections ( Section 4 (1) IfSG). It works with the relevant federal authorities, state authorities, national reference centers and other scientific institutions and specialist societies, as well as with foreign bodies such as the World Health Organization ( Section 4 (3) IfSG). According to Section 4 (2) IfSG, it primarily evaluates the data on notifiable diseases and pathogens, makes them available to other authorities, publishes them and advises policy makers on the basis of this data. It also carries out epidemiological and laboratory-based analyzes as well as research on the cause, diagnosis and prevention of communicable diseases.

In the case of measures to monitor, prevent and combat threatening communicable diseases, it also provides cross-border administrative assistance at the request of the highest state health authorities . In the field of zoonoses and microbial food poisoning, it works with the Federal Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety , the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and the Friedrich Loeffler Institute .

Reporting requirement

National

In addition to the list of notifiable diseases and pathogens ( § 6 , § 7 IfSG), this section contains the persons required to report (doctors and laboratories, § 8 IfSG) and the necessary information that a report must contain. A distinction is made between reporting by name, stating the surname and first name of the person concerned to the health department ( Section 9 IfSG) and reporting by name to the Robert Koch Institute ( Section 10 IfSG). There are special forms for reporting. Specifically, pathogens that could require direct action by the health department, such as certain food poisoning ( botulism ), must be reported by name. Evidence of HI viruses , for example , in which case-related pseudonymization is carried out (Section 10 (2) sentence 3 no.1, Section 7 (3) sentence 1 no.2 IfSG) does not need to be reported by name .

The transmission is usually carried out electronically using the special SurvNet @ RKI software . In order to modernize the previous system and to achieve a faster mutual transmission of data from laboratories, doctors, community facilities, health authorities, state authorities, RKI in compliance with the GDPR , after the EHEC epidemic in Germany in 2011, the project for the development and testing of DEMIS , Submitted to the German Electronic Reporting and Information System for Infection Protection through a corresponding bill to expand the IfSG by the Federal Ministry of Health and the Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection jointly in August 2011 ( Section 14 IfSG). A five-year project duration from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 was planned. At the beginning of 2012 the law was passed by the Bundestag and was presented to the Federal Council's mediation committee. In mid-May 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany , the end of the project, the full expansion of DEMIS, is still set for December 31, 2020 and will be completed with the third implementation stage, in which, in addition to the laboratories, the doctors and other notifying parties can meet their reporting obligation electronically. On June 4, the RKI announced that the obligation to notify the test results on SARS-CoV-2 by name in accordance with Section 7 (4) IfSG could not be processed practically at the RKI without electronic transmission by DEMIS due to the large number. Therefore, the notifications do not have to be made until the first expansion stages of DEMIS are available.

Section 13 IfSG provides forso-called sentinel surveysfor further epidemiological monitoring , which are used to collect anonymous, sample-like data with which to conclude the spread of a (mostly) infectious disease.

The section also contains various authorizations to issue statutory instruments . An example was the Order of the Federal Minister of Health of 18 March 2016 (IfSG reporting requirement adjustment Regulation), with the result § 15 was extended IfSG the circle of notifiable diseases and pathogens according to §§ 6, 7 IfSG on the suspicion of disease, the disease and the Death from zoonotic influenza (" bird flu "), the so-called hospital germ Clostridioides difficile and various arboviruses . The reporting obligations from this ordinance were integrated into the IfSG by the Measles Protection Act and the IfSG reporting obligation adjustment ordinance repealed.

Limited until May 23, 2020, the ordinance on the extension of the reporting obligation pursuant to Section 6 Paragraph 1 Clause 1 Number 1 and Section 7 Paragraph 1 Clause 1 of the Infection Protection Act to infections with the novel coronavirus that first appeared in Wuhan / People's Republic of China in December 2019 ("2019-nCoV") extended the obligation to report by name to the suspicion of illness, illness and death caused by the novel coronavirus (" 2019-nCoV "), as well as positive and negative detection of the SARS virus -CoV-2. The obligation to report the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pathogen has since been set out in Section 6 Paragraph 1 No. 1 lit. t, § 7 Abs. 1 Nr. 44a IfSG permanently regulated by law. Based on the authorization in Section 20i (3) SGB V, the Federal Ministry of Health can oblige the statutory health insurance (GKV) by ordinance to pay for tests for the coronavirus or antibody tests if the German Bundestag has determined an epidemic situation of national significance.

International

The Robert Koch Institute must assess a possible health emergency of international scope for the area of ​​communicable diseases in accordance with the International Health Regulations and notify the World Health Organization (WHO) ( Section 12 (1) IfSG) of dangers of biological or unknown origin in the form of communicable diseases , antibiotic resistance and nosocomial infections as well as biotoxins or other harmful biological agents that are not related to communicable diseases, the European Center for the Prevention and Control of Diseases (ECDC) ( § 12 Abs. 2 IfSG).

Communicable Disease Prevention

General and special measures

In order to prevent communicable diseases, the law provides for individual measures by the competent authorities, in the case of imminent danger also by the health department, as well as regulation by ordinance of the state governments.

Which authorities are responsible in the individual federal states is usually regulated by relevant jurisdiction ordinances.

Section 16 (1) IfSG contains a general clause for administrative decisions on a case-by-case basis if facts are established that could lead to the occurrence of a communicable disease. Section 17 (1) and (2) IfSG authorize special measures, in particular to destroy objects that are afflicted with notifiable pathogens, such as contaminated food, and to combat pests that can spread pathogens.

Section 17 (4) and (5) IfSG authorize the enactment of ordinances to prevent communicable diseases and to identify and combat pests , itch mites and head lice . The state governments can transfer the authorization to other bodies.

While a certain order presupposes a specific health risk, an abstract risk is sufficient for the decree. Examples are the North Rhine-Westphalian ordinance for the prevention of communicable diseases in certain commercial activities , statutory ordinances on the control of rats or ordinances on a pigeon feeding ban.

Objections and actions for contestation against individual measures according to Sections 16, 17 IfSG have no suspensive effect due to their particular importance for public health (Section 16 (8), Section 17 (6) IfSG, Section 80 (2) No. 3 VwGO ).

Vaccinations

The Federal Center for Health Education and the health authorities inform the population about the importance of vaccinations and other measures of specific prophylaxis of communicable diseases ( Section 20, Paragraph 1 IfSG).

The Standing Vaccination Commission gives recommendations for carrying out protective vaccinations and for carrying out other measures for the specific prophylaxis of communicable diseases ( Section 20 (2) IfSG). These recommendations are the basis for the statutory health insurance obligation ( § 20i SGB ​​V ). The STIKO vaccination recommendations have been recognized as a medical standard in the case law of the Federal Court of Justice since 2000 and are compatible with the best interests of the child .

Germany and the other European member states of the WHO have set themselves the goal of eliminating measles and rubella in Europe.

For people in community and health facilities who were born after December 31, 1970, vaccination against measles according to Section 20 (8) IfSG has been mandatory since March 1, 2020. People who work in day-care centers, schools, homes, asylum seeker accommodation or prisons must, according to Proof of appropriate vaccination protection in accordance with Section 20 (9) IfSG, as well as the people who are cared for or are accommodated there ( Section 20 (11) IfSG). The voluntary nature of the vaccination decision itself remains unaffected by these regulations. The requirement that certain people must have adequate vaccination against measles, however, constitutes an indirect interference with the fundamental right to physical integrity ( Art. 2, Paragraph 2, Sentence 1 of the Basic Law). The legislature keeps the interference through the public goals pursued by the Health protection justified. Because measles is one of the most contagious infectious diseases in humans. So-called subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE) is a serious and always fatal brain disease that can occur as a late consequence of measles infection in early life.

Section 20 (6) and (7) IfSG contain statutory authorizations for the Federal Ministry of Health and the state governments to oblige threatened sections of the population to take part in vaccinations or other specific prophylaxis measures if a communicable disease with clinically severe forms occurs and with its epidemic spread is to be expected. Neither the federal government nor the states have made use of this authorization to date. Therefore, currently (as of January 2016) there are no legal bases that authorize a limited vaccination requirement in the event of an epidemic spread of a communicable disease with severe forms.

Every vaccination is documented in a vaccination card ( § 22 IfSG).

Hospital germs

Section 23 IfSG regulates the fight against so-called hospital germs ( nosocomial infections ).

The Commission for Hospital Hygiene and Infection Prevention - KRINKO at the Robert Koch Institute creates recommendations for the prevention of nosocomial infections as well as for operational-organizational and structural-functional measures of hygiene in hospitals , as well as for hygiene management and methods for detection, recording, evaluation and targeted Control these infections. Another commission (Commission Anti-Infectives, Resistance and Therapy - ART) draws up recommendations with general principles for diagnostics and antimicrobial therapy, especially for infections with resistant pathogens.

Hospitals and similar facilities such as day clinics and dialysis facilities, but also medical practices with outpatient operations, nursing and rescue services must comply with these recommendations. In this respect, the facilities concerned are subject to infection hygiene monitoring by the health department.

In addition, Section 23 (8) of the IfSG provides for the necessary measures to prevent, detect, record and combat nosocomial infections and pathogens with resistance to be regulated by state ordinances.

Germany ranks moderately in the ranking of deaths due to infections during inpatient medical treatment. Of the approximately 2,300 German hospitals, around 600 facilities do not have a specialist in hygiene . The 1,233 preventive or rehabilitation facilities, for which hygiene officers must also be appointed by the end of 2016, are not yet taken into account. Regulations for the tasks of the hygiene officer are different in the federal states. As a substitute solution, in individual federal states the appointment of a hygiene specialist who does not have to be a specialist in hygiene is permitted in a secondary task (wording of the ordinance: "[...] a clinically active doctor in the facility who has appropriate knowledge and experience in Hygiene and infection prevention has [...] ").

Combating communicable diseases

The determination and treatment of notifiable diseases and pathogens are reserved for doctors ( Section 24, sentence 1 IfSG).

On the basis of corresponding reports, the health authorities ex officio undertake the necessary investigations in order to secure the assumption of a suspected disease or infection, in particular about the type, cause, source of infection and spread of the disease ( Section 25 (1) IfSG). For this purpose, the offices are authorized, for example, to enter properties, rooms, facilities and facilities and to inspect books or other documents and to make copies, photocopies or extracts from them and to examine other objects or request or take samples for examination. If necessary, other authorities whose area of ​​responsibility is affected will be informed by the health department, for example the food control authorities if a certain food could be the cause of a communicable disease, the animal health authorities if pathogens of a communicable disease have been transmitted from animals to an affected person or those responsible for the Authority responsible for immission control in the event of an accumulation of infections with Legionella , which could have been transmitted to humans through aerosols in the outside air ( Section 27 (4) IfSG).

Sick people and people suspected of being infected or suspected of being infected can be summoned by the health department for external examinations, x-ray examinations, tuberculin tests, blood sampling and swabs of skin and mucous membranes ( Section 25 (3) IfSG). With the consent of the patient, the attending physician may participate ( Section 26 IfSG). The health authorities are also allowed to carry out an investigation into the dead ( Section 25 (4) IfSG).

Restriction of fundamental rights through protective measures

In order to prevent the spread of communicable diseases, the competent authority takes the necessary protective measures, insofar as and for as long as these are necessary ( Section 28 (1) sentence 1 IfSG).

§ 28 para. 1 IfSG obliges the authority to act (the "if" of action), however, it acknowledges regarding the "how" a selection of discretion with respect to the protection measure to be taken one. This is based on the consideration that the range of protective measures that can be used in the event of a communicable disease cannot be determined in advance. The legislature has therefore designed Section 28 (1) IfSG as a general clause . The authority's discretion is limited by the fact that it must be about "necessary protective measures" that are required to prevent the (further) spread of the disease. In addition, the principle of proportionality sets limits to the discretion .

The primary addressees of Section 28 (1) IfSG are sick people, suspected illnesses, suspected contagionists and those who have eliminated the disease. These persons are legally defined in § 2 No. 4–7 IfSG in terms of a tier ratio . However, other third parties (“ non-interferers ”) can also be the addressees of measures, for example to protect them from infection. In the case of a highly contagious pathogen which, if infected, would very likely lead to a fatal illness, in the opinion of the Federal Administrative Court, given the serious consequences, it is imperative that the comparatively low probability of contact with an infected person or an infected object is sufficient, in order to be classified as a contagious suspect according to § 2 No. 7 IfSG.

According to Section 28 (1) Sentence 2 IfSG, the competent authority can restrict or prohibit events or other gatherings of people and, in conjunction with Section 33 IfSG, close or partially close the community facilities mentioned there for the care of minors such as day-care centers, after-school care centers and schools. It can also oblige people not to leave the place where they are or not to enter places specified by them until the necessary protective measures have been implemented ( curfew , lockdown ). Instead of regulation by administrative act , corresponding do's and don'ts can also be issued by ordinance of the state governments ( § 32 IfSG). The Munich Administrative Court is of the opinion that the permissible form of action for nationwide exit restrictions vis-à-vis anyone who not only affect a group of people who are determined or determinable according to general characteristics within the meaning of Section 35 sentence 2 VwVfG is not the general order , but the statutory ordinance.

With the law for the protection of the population in an epidemic situation of national scope , § 28 IfSG was revised. Since March 28, 2020 in so far apart from the will fundamental rights of freedom of the person ( Art. 2 para. 2 sentence 2 GG), the freedom of assembly ( Art. 8 of the Basic Law) and the inviolability of the home ( Art. 13 para. 1 GG) also the fundamental right of freedom of movement ( Article 11, Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law) is restricted.

The measures are monitored by the health department (Section 28 Paragraph 3, Section 16 Paragraph 2 IfSG).

Protective measures can be challenged with an objection and an action for rescission , but because of their particular importance for public health, they have no suspensive effect (Section 28 (3), Section 16 (8) IfSG, Section 80 (2) No. 3 VwGO ). Therefore, preliminary legal protection must first be sought ( Section 80 (5) VwGO). An application for an interim order, with which the court is to oblige the authority to take (specific) action, is also permissible ( Section 123 (1) VwGO).

Violations of enforceable protective measures constitute a criminal offense and are punished with imprisonment for up to two years or with a fine ( Section 75 (1) No. 1 IfSG).

observation

The permissible protective measures also include the observation of sick people, suspects and suspects of infection by the health department. For this purpose, the person concerned has to § 29 IfSG to have them examined and treated, to allow access to their home, on request about all circumstances affecting their state of health, a change of main home or habitual residence as well as the job in the food or health sector, at schools and in day-care centers as well as in shared accommodation or to notify prisons to the health department.

Since the repeal of the law to combat sexually transmitted diseases and the entry into force of the IfSG, there is no longer a mandatory examination of prostitutes for sexually transmitted diseases (so-called Bockschein ) in Germany . Nor was it reintroduced with the Prostitution Act.

The Prostitute Protection Act of 2017, however, provides for regular health advice in Section 10 , and in Section 32 also a condom requirement for prostitutes and their customers.

quarantine

People who are ill with communicable diseases or are suspected of having them can be segregated in hospitals or in any other suitable manner ( Section 30 (1) IfSG). Quarantine is one of the most drastic measures of the Infection Protection Act. The federal states and the municipalities must ensure that the necessary rooms, facilities and means of transport are available ( § 30 Paragraph 6, 7 IfSG). The staff working there must have the necessary vaccination protection or specific prophylaxis.

In 1987, for example, in the fight against the spread of the HI virus , the Bavarian state government considered a legislative initiative to tighten the Federal Disease Act with compulsory tests for applicants for the public service and prisoners, the expulsion of HIV-positive foreigners and the quarantine of infected people "In special homes".

An intentional or negligent violation of an enforceable quarantine prescribed in accordance with Section 30 IfSG is punishable ( Section 75 Paragraph 1 No. 1, Paragraph 4 IfSG).

COVID-19 pandemic in Germany

At the federal level and in all federal states, on the occasion of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany, statutory ordinances with criminal penalties based on Sections 28, 32 in conjunction with Sections 73 (1a) no.6 , 74, 75 (1) no.1, para. 2 and 3 IfSG, in particular, the fundamental rights of freedom of the person, freedom of assembly and freedom of movement are massively restricted. The isolation in domestic quarantine for sick people and contact persons was ordered locally by general decree.

Infection protection in the workplace

Professional activity ban

In order to counter the risk of the spread of communicable diseases, sick people, suspected illnesses, contagious suspects, excretors and other persons can be prohibited from exercising certain professional activities in whole or in part ( Section 31 IfSG). The prohibition of activity can also be carried out with an observation order in accordance with § 29 IfSG IfSG are connected so that the health department can assess whether the prohibition of activity has to be adjusted or lifted due to changed circumstances.

The regulation applies to people who do not pose a risk of infection for the general public in the context of normal social contact, but who are exposed to the risk of injury due to a particular occupational activity and who can become a source of infection for other people as a result of injuries to the skin or other organs.

In 2012 , the German Association for Combating Viral Diseases and the Society for Virology developed specific recommendations for HIV- positive employees in the health care system, compliance with which can be the basis of an official or a judicial decision. In 2020, the recommendations for hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus infected people in the healthcare sector were updated.

Community facilities

In communal facilities within the meaning of Section 33 IfSG such as day-care centers, schools and homes, infants, children and young people come into close contact with each other and with the caring staff on a daily basis. There were already special provisions for these facilities in the Federal Disease Act, as close contacts promote the transmission of pathogens and the more severe the disease progression can be expected the younger the children concerned are.

Adults infected with certain communicable diseases are not allowed to work in these facilities in which they have contact with those cared for there until, according to a medical judgment, there is no longer any fear of spreading the disease or lice ( Section 34 Paragraphs 1–3 IfSG). This applies accordingly to the children cared for in the communal facility who are not allowed to enter rooms used for the operation of the communal facility, who are not allowed to use facilities of the communal facility and who are not allowed to participate in events of the communal facility. The facility must be informed of an illness, which in turn must notify the health department.

If children cared for in community facilities are infected with pathogens and in individual cases there is a risk of further spread, the competent authority can order the necessary protective measures, in particular close the facility or parts of it ( Section 34 (9), Section 28 (1) sentence 2 IfSG) .

The initial admission to a day-care center is in accordance with Section 34 (10a) sentence 1 IfSG only depends on the parents' evidence that vaccination advice has been used in accordance with the recommendations of the Standing Vaccination Commission. Sufficient vaccination protection for children from the age of one against measles has been required since March 1, 2020 according to However, Section 20 (8) IfSG is mandatory.

In addition to the facilities in which mainly minors are cared for, outpatient and inpatient care facilities, homeless shelters, asylum seekers' homes and penal institutions must also draw up so-called hygiene plans for the internal procedures for infection hygiene in order to comply with infection hygiene and are monitored in terms of infection hygiene by the health department ( Section 36 subs . 1 IfSG).

A special examination for pulmonary tuberculosis is carried out in connection with admission to nursing homes, homeless shelters and asylum seekers' homes .

Handling of food

In contrast to Section 31 IfSG, which authorizes the health department to prohibit a certain professional activity in individual cases , Section 42 (1) IfSG contains a statutory prohibition of activities and employment for people who suffer from certain communicable diseases, and in their professional activity with food come into contact that a transmission of pathogens to the food is to be feared. The relevant diseases are listed in Section 42 (1) IfSG (e.g. salmonellosis ), the relevant foods in Section 42 (2) IfSG (meat, milk, egg products, baked goods, etc.)

The prohibition applies to people in the production and trade that produce food, treat or place on the market or work in kitchens of restaurants and community facilities as well as for employees of official control of foodstuffs ( § 42 para. 3 IfSG), but not in the private Housekeeping ( Section 42 Paragraph 1 Sentence 3 IfSG).

The health department can allow exceptions to the prohibition in individual cases if measures are taken to prevent the transmission of the diseases and pathogens listed ( Section 42 (4) IfSG).

The first time any activity sets a to be certified instruction by the health department requires that the employer or employer repeat by a sequence instruction every two years must ( § 43 para. 1, 4 IfSG) similar to training on safety and health at work in accordance . § 12 ArbSchG .

After studies had shown that the cause of the pandemic waves of disease caused by Salmonella lies in the contamination of feed and raw animal products in connection with insufficient thermal treatment during the production, treatment or marketing of certain foods and that infected personnel play a comparatively minor role as the cause of food-borne infections plays, the annual medical examination of the employees and evidence in a health certificate , which was still provided for in the Federal Disease Act, was not included in the IfSG. Instead, the regulation relies on the creation of knowledge through instruction and on cooperation between those involved. In individual cases, the health authorities make use of the general clause of § 16 IfSG and order an examination.

Activities with pathogens

Regulatory surveillance

Working with pathogens is generally subject to a preventive ban, subject to permission ( Section 44 IfSG). Pathogen in the sense of the IfSG is an agent capable of reproduction ( virus , bacterium , fungus , parasite ) or any other biological transmissible agent that can cause an infection or communicable disease in humans ( § 2 No. 1 IfSG). When working with pathogens in particular experiments involving vermehrungsfähigfen pathogens, microbiological and serological tests to determine of communicable diseases and the continued growth of pathogens to view (§ 20 para. 2 Federal Epidemic Act ) d. H. both diagnostic and research activities.

The purpose of the permit requirement is a hazard control in order to check the activities in question for their harmlessness in advance, but not to prohibit the activities in general. Therefore, there is also a right to a permit if the prescribed safety precautions are met. However, anyone who works without a permit under Section 44 IfSG ( Section 75 (1) No. 3 IfSG) is punished with a prison sentence of up to two years or a fine .

The requirement to report pathogens and the activities carried out, which may pose different risks, are used to determine whether the permit is not required. Doctors, dentists and veterinarians, for example, do not require a permit for certain microbiological examinations if these are not aimed at specifically detecting pathogens that are subject to mandatory reporting ( Section 45 (1) IfSG). The manufacture of pharmaceuticals and medical products is already subject to a permit under the Medicines and Medical Products Act , so that they are exempt from the permit requirement in accordance with Section 45 (2) IfSG is excluded. According to Section 45 (3) IfSG, particularly competent persons can exceptionally be exempted from the requirement for a permit for certain activities that require a permit; according to Section 45 (4) IfSG, activities that do not require a permit can be prohibited if the person who carries them out has proven to be unreliable .

Regardless of any authorization requirement, any activity involving pathogens is subject to notification . The activity is prohibited if the health of the population is endangered ( Section 49 (3) IfSG).

Poliovirus

Germany participates in the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) of the World Health Organization with the aim of eradicating polio worldwide .

One component of the initiative is to record where wild polioviruses, polio vaccine viruses and materials that may contain polioviruses are stored, move these stocks, if they are temporarily still needed, gradually to particularly secure central facilities, and finally move them to destroy. This is to prevent outbreaks of polio, for example through laboratory accidents, after the WHO vaccination programs were able to completely prevent new infections with certain types of poliovirus.

The legal basis for the safe containment of polioviruses in facilities (so-called laboratory containment of polioviruses) with regard to the intended destruction is § 50a IfSG.

Compensation in special cases

loss of earnings

Persons who are banned from their previous professional activity in whole or in part according to Section 31 IfSG or who are subjected to a quarantine measure and thus suffer a loss of earnings, receive monetary compensation from the responsible federal state if they do not avoid the prohibition of activity or isolation by using a vaccination could ( § 56 Abs. 1 IfSG). The regulation applies to employees and the self-employed , but only for natural persons, not for companies.

Insofar as the order prohibiting activity or quarantine is lawful, it is an equitable regulation, not a fault-based state liability . Since the persons, as carriers of pathogens, are also troublemakers in the sense of police law, the legal notions of compensation for a special victim as with the use of danger prevention do not apply despite a lack of responsibility.

Since the above-mentioned persons are affected by fate in a similar way as the sick, it seems advisable to grant them benefits as they would receive as an insured person in the statutory health insurance in the event of illness. For the first six weeks, compensation in the amount of the loss of earnings is granted in accordance with the continued payment of wages in the event of illness (net wages, Section 56 (3) sentence 1 IfSG), from the beginning of the seventh week in the amount of the statutory sick pay . If the person concerned is allowed to continue to perform part of his previous activities and therefore only a reduction in income occurs, the loss of earnings is equal to the difference between the previous average earned income and the earned income in the calendar month after the prohibited activity was stopped ( Section 56 (3) sentence 3 IfSG) .

With Art. 1 No. 7 of the law for the protection of the population in the event of an epidemic situation of national scope , a regulation was introduced with effect from March 30, 2020 to mitigate loss of earnings suffered by working custodians of children when they do not pursue their professional activity because facilities for the care of children or schools are temporarily closed due to official orders or their entry is temporarily prohibited (Section 56 Paragraph 1a IfSG new version, Section 28 Paragraph 1 Sentence 2, Section 33 IfSG). The entitlement is limited to a maximum period of six weeks and the amount to 67% of the loss of earnings incurred by the employed custodian up to a maximum amount of 2,016 euros per month for a full month and does not exist for the time in which a closure is anyway due to the School holidays would take place. The regulation will expire on January 1, 2021.

Compensation is granted by the competent authority upon request. In Bavaria, for example, these are the governments , in North Rhine-Westphalia the regional associations . In the case of employees, the employer has to pay the compensation to the competent authority for the first six weeks, which is then reimbursed by the authority ( Section 56 (5) IfSG). The employer and the self-employed can request an advance payment in the anticipated amount of the reimbursement amount from the authorities ( Section 56 (12) IfSG).

For disputes, the ordinary legal process to the civil courts is given ( § 68 Abs. 1 IfSG).

Vaccine damage

Pension entitlement

The Reichsgericht rejected compensation for vaccination damage. The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) broke with this case law in 1953. In the Federal Disease Act of 1962, the principles developed by the BGH in §§ 50–55 BSeuchG were for the first time legally regulated “as an application of the right to sacrifice ”.

The provision of care in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Supply Act for people who have suffered damage to health through vaccination has been regulated in Section 60 IfSG since 2001 and is systematically part of the social compensation law ( Section 68 No. 7d SGB ​​I ).

Vaccination damage is legally defined in § 2 No. 11 IfSG as “the health and economic consequences of a health damage caused by the vaccination that goes beyond the usual extent of a vaccination reaction; Vaccination damage is also present if a person has been vaccinated with reproductive pathogens and someone other than the vaccinated person has been harmed. "Vaccination damage also includes the consequences of damage to health caused by an accident on the way there or back or when a vaccination is carried out also with an accompanying person ( Section 60 (5) sentence 1 IfSG, Section 1 (2) letters e, f, Section 8a BVG).

The care extends to the health and economic consequences of the damage for the injured party himself as well as the surviving dependents of an injured party and the partners of a marriage-like community ( § 60 Abs. 1, 4 IfSG, § 9 BVG analogous). The injured party is also to be granted therapeutic educational treatment, therapeutic gymnastics and movement therapeutic exercises ( Section 62 IfSG).

The pension offices are responsible , in the event of a dispute the social courts ( § 64 , § 68 Paragraph 2 IfSG).

Reporting requirement

The suspicion of damage to health that goes beyond the usual extent of a vaccination reaction must be reported ( Section 6 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 No. 3 IfSG) and is reported by the Health Office in accordance with Section 11 (4) IfSG transmitted to the responsible state authority and the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI). The report should contain all identifiable information, such as the name of the product, the name or company of the pharmaceutical company, the batch number, the time of vaccination and the start of the disease. The report is made in pseudonymised form (personal information must be made unrecognizable).

Consumers can also report to the PEI.

The Paul Ehrlich Institute evaluates the reports to determine whether the assessment of the benefit-risk ratio of the vaccine in question changes and, if necessary, measures, e.g. B. a recall according to the Medicines Act (AMG) are to be taken ( § 62 , § 77 AMG).

statistics

From 2005 to 2009, 1,036 applications for recognition of vaccine damage were submitted, and 169 compensation was granted in the same period. The average number of applications submitted in Germany a year is 207, the number of applications for vaccination damage recognition is 34. This compares to almost 45 million vaccination doses that were billed and vaccinated at the expense of the statutory health insurance in 2008 alone.

Oral vaccination against poliomyelitis (polio) is burdened with a measurable number of vaccine damage . It is estimated that one to four million vaccinations with the oral polio vaccine will cause vaccine damage.

reform

As of January 1, 2024, social compensation benefits in the event of vaccination damage will be included in the Fourteenth Book of the Social Code (SGB XIV) (Section 24 SGB XIV, Art. 46 of the Law on the Regulation of Social Compensation Law ).

Compensation for lost items

Section 57 of the BSeuchG in its original version from 1961 provided for compensation for the owners of objects that had been infected with transmissible pathogens and destroyed because they could not be disinfected. Practically the most significant application was orders relating to contaminated food, for example poultry contaminated with Salmonella. The law did not differentiate whether the measure was directed against a disruptor or a non-disruptor within the meaning of police law. The regulation had "because of its extraordinary generosity led to a considerable, unjustified financial burden on the federal states." In addition, the health authorities had tried, contrary to the purpose of the Federal Disease Act, to dispense with epidemiological measures as far as possible in order to avoid the legal effects of compensation. Therefore, the new version of § 57 in 1971 saw a compensation before only if the measure is directed against a non-interfering and therefore compensable expropriation ( Art. 14 was present para. 3 GG).

This regulation was adopted in § 65 IfSG. According to this, compensation is to be paid in cash if, as a result of a measure in accordance with § 16 and § 17, objects are destroyed, damaged or otherwise reduced in value or another not only insignificant financial disadvantage is caused; however, compensation will not be given to those whose objects are afflicted with pathogens or with health pests as presumed carriers of such pathogens or are suspected of being ( Section 65 (1) sentence 1 IfSG).

The owners of contaminated objects (“ disruptors of the condition ”) who have to tolerate protective interventions in the urgent public interest remain excluded from the group of beneficiaries. It is limited to the "non-disruptors"; H. those who are affected by the officially ordered damage or destruction of objects that are not contaminated with pathogens or are suspected of being, but are destroyed as a precaution.

It covers general and specific measures to prevent communicable diseases, but not measures to combat them. For the danger prevention / combating phase, the law only provides for a claim to compensation for loss of earnings for persons affected by the prohibition of professional practice (Section 56 IfSG).

For disputes about compensation claims according to § 65 the ordinary legal process to the civil courts is given ( § 68 Abs. 1 IfSG).

water

Drinking and industrial water

Drinking and bathing water must be of such a nature that there is no cause for concern about damage to human health, in particular from pathogens. It is subject to quality control by the health authorities ( Section 37 (3) IfSG).

Section 37 (1) IfSG concerns “water for human consumption.” This includes both the drinking water made available to private households for immediate consumption, regardless of its origin, from a distribution network, from tankers, bottles or other containers, as well as that in food companies for production water used in products for human consumption. The term is used in the sense of the EU Drinking Water Directive. The requirements for drinking water arespecifiedin the Drinking Water Ordinance, issued on the basis of Section 38 (1) IfSG.

Section 37 (2) IfSG applies to all facilities in which swimming and bathing pool water is not made available exclusively for private purposes. An ordinance specifying the requirements for swimming and bathing water in accordance with There is no § 38 Abs. 2 IfSG. However, Section 39 (2) in conjunction with Section 16 (6-8) IfSG alsoensurescompliance with the provisions of Section 37 (2) IfSG through immediately enforceable measures by the competent authorities, without the need for a statutory ordinance. A recommendation from the Federal Environment Agency in accordance with Section 40 IfSG, in conjunction with the DIN 19643 standard for pool water treatment , specifiesthe microbiological and chemical requirements for water quality in swimming pools and baths and describes measures to be taken if the requirements are not met.

sewage

Even when disposing of wastewater, there must be no danger to human health from pathogens. Section 41 (1) IfSG contains a corresponding obligation for those subject to waste water disposal. These are those legal entities under public law who are obliged to do so under state law ( Section 56 WHG ), usually cities and municipalities.

On the other hand, wastewater that is not to be disposed of but is to be recycled is subject to the Fertilizers Act as secondary raw material fertilizer .

Penalty and fine regulations

The penalties and fines of § 73 to § 75 IfSG are intended to effectively reinforce the requirements and prohibitions that serve to prevent or combat communicable diseases. The primary purpose of the punishment is general prevention.

The long catalog of regulations on fines in Section 73 (1a) No. 1–24 IfSG specifies, in particular, violations of reporting, information, notification and proof obligations without harming any person. The fines can be up to 25,000 euros ( Section 73 (2) IfSG).

When the Federal Disease Act was passed in 1960, the relevant regulation in Article 231 of the Swiss Criminal Code was the model for the criminal liability of spreading particularly dangerous diseases regardless of the degree of damage to a person's health ( Section 75 (3) IfSG) . Spreading is the transmission of the disease to another with the intention of infecting an indefinite number of people.

The high penalty of up to 5 years imprisonment applies, for example, to violations of enforceable quarantine orders, professional activity bans or exit restrictions if the perpetrator thereby spreads a reportable illness. The same threat of punishment applies if the perpetrator determined in accordance with 73 IfSG only intentionally commits an act reinforced with a fine as an administrative offense and thereby spreads a reportable illness, for example contrary to a legal prohibition according to Section 34 (1) IfSG is active in a community facility ( Section 74 , Section 73 (1a) No. 14 IfSG). The act thereby loses the character of a mere regulatory injustice and is assessed as a criminal offense with regard to its socio-ethical reprehensibility.

In the case of negligent inspection, the penalty is imprisonment for up to one year or a fine ( Section 75 (4) IfSG). For example, violating an occupational activity ban, which is intended to prevent the spread of pathogens, creates a particular danger situation. If this results in an infection, this could also be punished as negligent bodily harm according to Section 229 of the Criminal Code with imprisonment for up to three years.

Objects to which a criminal offense according to § 75 Abs. 1 or 3 IfSG relates can be confiscated ( § 76 IfSG), for example pathogens with which the perpetrator works illegally contrary to § 44 IfSG ( § 75 Abs. 1 No. 3 IfSG ).

Further regulations

The costs for the transmission of reports, surveys, investigations, protective measures, X-ray examinations, etc. are to be met from public funds ( Section 69 of the Infection Protection Act ).

The enforcement of the Infection Protection Act is transferred for all soldiers to the competent bodies of the Bundeswehr, such as people who are accommodated in Bundeswehr facilities, live there, Bundeswehr members on the transport, during marches, maneuvers and exercises, as well as instructions according to Sections 42 and 43 for people who work in Bundeswehr facilities ( Section 70 IfSG). The on-site doctors take measures to combat communicable diseases in cooperation with the health department. The Robert Koch Institute also makes the results of its epidemiological evaluations available to the Bundeswehr Medical Service Command ( Section 4 (2) No. 3b IfSG).

In the area of ​​federal railways and magnetic levitation trains, the Federal Railway Authority is responsible for enforcing the IfSG for rail vehicles and for fixed systems for the exclusive filling of rail vehicles ( Section 72 IfSG).

A permit for working with and dealing with pathogens that was granted on the basis of the Federal Disease Act continues to apply as a permit under Section 44 IfSG. The so-called health certificates ( health requirements when handling food ), which were issued before the Infection Protection Act came into force, remain valid and apply as a certificate of hygiene instruction in accordance with Section 43 (1) IfSG ( Section 77 IfSG).

Reforms

Federal law

With the IfSG, uniform regulations for the protection of the population against communicable diseases apply throughout Germany in order to create equivalent living conditions .

The federal laws are, however, generally implemented by the states ( Art. 83 GG). The state governments determine by ordinance the (state) authorities responsible for the implementation of the IfSG in the individual federal states ( Section 54 IfSG), which each independently perform the tasks of the IfSG for their local area of ​​responsibility.

In view of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany , it was criticized in the media that this decentralized responsibility in a federal system like Germany is deliberately wanted and sufficient if there is a need for action locally, but that responsibilities would have to exist in a nationwide danger situation that would be nationwide enable uniform enforcement.

The federal and state governments agreed on joint guidelines against the spread of the coronavirus on March 27, 2020 , until the law on the protection of the population in an epidemic situation of national scope came into force (Section 5 IfSG old version). With effect from March 28, 2020, this procedure was replaced by the determination of an "epidemic situation of national scope" by the German Bundestag (§ 5 IfSG new version) and the Federal Ministry of Health was authorized until April 1, 2021, without prejudice to the powers of the Laender to issue various orders or ordinances without the consent of the Bundesrat (Section 5 (2) No. 1–8 IfSG new version).

State legislation

On March 25, 2020, the Bavarian Infection Protection Act was enacted (GVBl. P. 174), which contains regulations to secure the supply of medical, nursing and sanitary material as well as the personnel capacity in the event of a "health emergency".

Audio book version

During the corona crisis in 2020, Argon Verlag published the Infection Protection Act as an audio book read by actor Christoph-Maria Herbst .

See also

literature

  • Jens Gerhardt: Infection Protection Act. Comment. 4th edition 2020, TWENTY SIX, ISBN 9783740767600 .
  • Stefan Bales, Hans Georg Baumann, Norbert Schnitzler: Infection Protection Act. Commentary and collection of rules . 2nd edition, Stuttgart 2003, ISBN 978-3-170-17613-3 .
  • Sigrid Lorz: Fight against hospital germs: The law to amend the Infection Protection Act and other laws , NJW 47/2011, 3397.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. Thomas Gerst: Infection Protection Act: Rapid response to the spread of dangerous infections , Ärzteblatt 2000; 97 (48): A-3226 / B-2716 / C-2534
  2. a b Helmut Erdle: Infektionsschutzgesetz , ecomed-Storck GmbH, 2018, 420 pages, p. 51 [General information on §§ 16, 17 (and on §§ 25 to 32)]
  3. Steiner in: Spickhoff, Medizinrecht , 3rd edition 2018, GG Art. 74 Rn. 5
  4. ^ Wittreck in: Dreier, Basic Law Commentary , 3rd edition 2015, Art. 74 Rn. 86
  5. On the question of the federal government's legislative competence for the public health service , Scientific Services of the German Bundestag (state of affairs as of July 31, 2019).
  6. ^ Infection Protection Act (IfSG): The Act to Prevent and Combat Infectious Diseases in Humans , abfallmanager-medizin.de, January 20, 2020.
  7. Coronavirus in Germany: These basic rights could be restricted - Ministry draws crisis scenario , Münchner Merkur , February 27, 2020.
  8. BGBl. I p. 1045
  9. Second recommendation for a resolution and final report of the 3rd committee of inquiry according to Article 44 of the Basic Law , BT-Drs. 12/8591 of October 25, 1994.
  10. Directive 98/83 / EC of the Council of November 3, 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption OJ. No. L 330 of December 5, 1998
  11. Decision No. 2119/98 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 1998 on the creation of a network for the epidemiological surveillance and control of communicable diseases in the Community OJ. No. L 268 of October 3, 1998
  12. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000.
  13. See Thomas Abeler: Von der Not zum Normalität: The nutritional situation and health of children and adolescents in post-war Westphalia with examples from the cities of Gütersloh and Münster , Internet portal Westfälische Geschichte, accessed on March 16, 2020.
  14. BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 37 ff.
  15. ^ Draft of a law for the protection of the population in an epidemic situation of national scope BT-Drs. 19/18111 of March 24, 2020.
  16. BT-Drs. 19/18111 of March 24, 2020.
  17. Decision recommendation of the Committee on Health (14th Committee) on the draft law of the parliamentary groups of the CDU / CSU and SPD - printed matter 19/18111 - draft of a law to protect the population in an epidemic situation of national scope BT-Drs. 19/18156 of March 25, 2020, p. 5.
  18. German Bundestag: session March 25, 2020 (154th session) 3:50 p.m., item 6. Accessed on April 25, 2020.
  19. cf. State organization and § 5 Infection Protection Act Scientific Services of the German Bundestag , elaboration from April 2, 2020
  20. Dispute over the lifting of the epidemic situation of national scope German Bundestag, June 18, 2020.
  21. General administrative regulation on the coordination of infection protection in epidemically significant cases (Administrative regulation-IfSG-Coordination - IfSGKoordinierungs-VwV) of December 12, 2013
  22. Bund-Länder Agreement: Guidelines against the spread of the coronavirus website of the Federal Government , March 16, 2020.
  23. ^ Robert Koch Institute: Notifiable diseases and pathogens: overview table as of September 2017
  24. Robert Koch Institute: Current Statistics of Notifiable Infectious Diseases, Germany , week 21, 2019 (data as of June 12, 2019). Epidemiological Bulletin No. 24, p. 212 ff.
  25. Under control, infographic on mandatory reporting, Apotheken Umschau 12/2017
  26. See, for example, forms , links for downloading Word documents, Baden-Württemberg State Health Office, accessed on March 11, 2020.
  27. Forwarding and processing of data on notifiable diseases according to the Infection Protection Act , Scientific Services of the German Bundestag (status of March 28, 2019), p. 7, accessed on May 14, 2020.
  28. Joint press release Berlin, May 3, 2012 One year after the EHEC outbreak in Germany , bundesgesundheitsministerium.de, accessed on May 14, 2020.
  29. DEMIS - German Electronic Reporting and Information System for Infection Protection , rki.de, accessed on May 14, 2020.
  30. Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Non-personal reporting of test results , rki.de, accessed on June 14, 2020.
  31. See framework recommendations for sentinel surveillance projects in infection epidemiology , German Working Group for Epidemiology (DAE), 2004.
  32. Ordinance on the adaptation of the reporting obligations under the Infection Protection Act to the epidemic situation (IfSG-Meldepflicht-Adaptungsverordnung - IfSGMeldAnpV) of March 18, 2016, Federal Law Gazette I p. 515
  33. Christian Jäkel: Report from Berlin , PharmR 2019, 686, beck-online
  34. § 20i Abs. 3 SGB V in the version of Art. 4 No. 4 of the second law for the protection of the population in an epidemic situation of national scope of 19 May 2020, Federal Law Gazette I p. 1018
  35. On the urgent responsibility of the health department: OVG Nordrhein-Westfalen, judgment of December 5, 2007 - 13 A 931/05 .
  36. See e.g. B. for North Rhine-Westphalia: Ordinance regulating responsibilities under the Infection Protection Act - ZVO-IfSG of November 28, 2000.
  37. See VG Saarlouis, decision of May 18, 2017 - 2 L 854/17 (order to clear out a building because of the everyday objects piled up in a “messie” household ).
  38. Federal Ministry of Health: Monitoring and control of mosquitoes. Legal basis April 20, 2018
  39. Ordinance on the prevention of communicable diseases in certain commercial activities (Infection Prevention Ordinance) of May 5, 2017, GVBl. 2017, 306
  40. Cf. Art. 16 Bavarian State Penal and Ordinance Act : The fight against feral pigeons "to protect public cleanliness" is assigned to the municipalities in Bavaria.
  41. See Robert Koch Institute: Recommendations of the Standing Vaccination Commission at the Robert Koch Institute - 2019/2020 , Epidemiological Bulletin, August 22, 2019 / No. 34.
  42. BGH, judgment of February 15, 2000 - VI ZR 48/99 , Rn. 23.
  43. BGH, decision of May 3, 2017 - XII ZB 157/16
  44. Federal Ministry of Health (Ed.): National Action Plan 2015–2020 for the Elimination of Measles and Rubella in Germany. Background, goals and strategies as of June 2015
  45. Art. 1 No. 8e of the Law on Protection against Measles and Strengthening Vaccination Prevention of February 10, 2020, Federal Law Gazette I p. 148
  46. ↑ National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians : Compulsory vaccination against measles from March 1, 2020. National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, March 1, 2020, accessed on May 13, 2020 .
  47. Cf. draft of a law for the protection against measles and to strengthen vaccination prevention (measles protection law) , BT-Drs. 19/13452 of September 23, 2019, p. 25 ff., 31.
  48. ^ Constitutional admissibility of mandatory vaccinations , Scientific Services of the German Bundestag, elaboration of January 27, 2016, p. 4.
  49. List of the currently valid KRINKO recommendations rki.de, accessed on March 11, 2020.
  50. ^ Recommendations of the Robert Koch Institute on hygiene measures in the context of the treatment of patients with an infection by SARS-CoV-2 rki.de, as of March 9, 2020
  51. Martin Mielke: News from the Commission for Hospital Hygiene and Infection Prevention: Nosocomial and difficult to treat infections. Current recommendations from KRINKO. Amendment of the IfSG March 23, 2012
  52. Position papers of the ART commission , rki.de, accessed on March 11, 2020.
  53. See Katja Peters: hospital inspections by the health department , hospital hygiene 2011, pp. 133–151.
  54. ^ Infection hygiene monitoring according to § 23 IfSG - "AG Hospital Hygiene" , Lower Saxony State Health Office , accessed on March 11, 2020.
  55. See for example Lower Saxony Ordinance on Hygiene and Infection Prevention in Medical Institutions (NMedHygVO) of March 26, 2012, Nds. GVBl. 2012, 41.
  56. Annual report of the EU Health Commissioner (PDF; 5.1 MB)
  57. ^ Hospital hygiene
  58. Dt. Hospital society: status of hygiene professionals
  59. Ordinance on hygiene and infection prevention in medical facilities (HygMedVO) NRW §5 of March 13, 2012 (PDF; 150 kB)
  60. Bales / Baumann: IfSG , 2001, § 25 Rn. 4 f.
  61. See, for example, for Baden-Württemberg: § 2, § 4 of the law on the implementation of the Animal Health Act and other animal health regulations (Tiergesundheitsausführungsgesetz - TierGesAG) , Journal of Laws of 2018, 223.
  62. Cf. Art. 1 of the draft law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations - Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz , BR-Drs. 566/99 p. 169.
  63. ^ VG Munich, decision of March 26, 2020 - M 26 E 20.1248
  64. Cf. draft of a fourth law to amend the Federal Disease Act , BT-Drs. 8/2468 p. 27 on the previous regulation in § 34 BSeuchG
  65. BVerwG, judgment of March 22, 2012 - 3 C 16.11 , Rn. 20, 24.
  66. BVerwG, judgment of March 22, 2012 - 3 C 16.11 , Rn. 25th
  67. Bales / Baumann: IfSG , 2001, § 28 Rn. 3.
  68. BVerwG, judgment of March 22, 2012 - 3 C 16.11 , Rn. 32.
  69. See e.g. B .: Containment of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2: State-wide cancellation of lessons and daycare closings ordered - Emergency care for employees of the public services of the Lower Saxony Ministry of Education , March 13, 2020.
  70. Coronavirus: What is now prohibited in Germany Berliner Morgenpost , March 17, 2020.
  71. VG Munich, decision of March 24, 2020 - M 26 S 20.1252; M 26 S 20.1255
  72. Stefan Aigner: After a complaint against exit restrictions: The Free State must improve. regensburg-digital , March 24, 2020.
  73. Bavaria has to improve the regulation on exit restrictions. Süddeutsche Zeitung , March 24, 2020.
  74. Art. 1 No. 6 of the law for the protection of the population in an epidemic situation of national scope of March 27, 2020, Federal Law Gazette I p. 587 590
  75. cf. on the admissibility of exit restrictions in accordance with Section 28 of the Infection Protection Act Scientific Services of the German Bundestag , elaboration dated April 2, 2020. FragDenStaat , accessed on April 15, 2020.
  76. ^ VG Stuttgart: Urgent motion against infection protection law late night shopping ban unsuccessful. beck-online, March 17, 2020.
  77. ^ VG Munich, decision of March 26, 2020 - M 26 E 20.1248
  78. See position paper on the discussion about the reintroduction of the mandatory STI examination for prostitutes (as of September 2014). Federal Association of Doctors in the Public Health Service , accessed on March 15, 2020.
  79. Tips for quarantine at home. Legal regulations in the event of a quarantine. In: bundesgesundheitsministerium.de. Federal Office for Civil Protection and Disaster Aid (BBK), p. 2 , accessed on March 15, 2020 : “The Infection Protection Act (IfSG) provides various legal instruments for measures to prevent and combat disease. The competent authorities, e.g. B. the health department, oblige people not to leave the place or not to enter certain places until the necessary protective measures have been taken. Section 30 IfSG enables quarantine as one of the most drastic measures. It serves to prevent the disease from spreading further. The responsible authorities check compliance. "
  80. Bavaria: Thinning out degeneration. Der Spiegel , March 16, 1987
  81. Johann Osel: When Bavaria Aids declared war. Süddeutsche Zeitung, February 25, 2017.
  82. Covid-19: Are the pandemic fundamental rights restrictions including mask lawful? Haufe.de, April 22, 2020.
  83. See, for example, general decree for the purpose of preventing and combating the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (Corona virus) - travelers returning from risk areas - order domestic quarantine community Möhnesee, March 19, 2020.
  84. cf. For example, general decree on the domestic segregation of people infected with the novel corona virus (SARS-CoV-2) and their contact persons to contain and protect against the spread of the respiratory disease COVID-19 District Office Main-Tauber-Kreis, 23. March 2020.
  85. cf. For example, general decree ordering isolation in quarantine at home for contact persons in Category I (higher risk of infection) for confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases, Rosenheim District Office, March 24, 2020.
  86. See VG München, decision of September 18, 2017 - M 18 S 17.3676 (restricted activity ban for plastic surgeons due to HIV infection).
  87. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 75.
  88. Prevention of the nosocomial transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) by HIV-positive employees in the health care system Hygiene & Medizin 2012, pp. 413–418.
  89. Recommendations of the German Association for Combating Viral Diseases: Prevention of the nosocomial transmission of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) by health care workers January 30, 2020.
  90. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 76.
  91. See Robert Koch Institute: Recommendations for re-admission to community facilities in accordance with Section 34 of the Infection Protection Act as of January 13, 2020
  92. ↑ Compulsory vaccination should protect children from measles Federal Ministry of Health , March 6, 2020.
  93. See general hygiene plan according to § 36 Infection Protection Act for children's facilities (crèches, nurseries, day-care centers, also integrative, and day nurseries) , federal state working group for the creation of hygiene plans according to § 36 IfSG, status: April 2007.
  94. See general hygiene plan according to § 36 Infection Protection Act for old people's and elderly care homes and other facilities according to § 1 Heimgesetz , federal state working group for the creation of hygiene plans according to § 36 IfSG, as of April 2007.
  95. B. Geisel, A. Hofmann: Hygiene plans for the 21st century - the national working group introduces itself. Healthcare 2016, p. 78.
  96. ^ Fritz Oberparleiter: Infection hygiene problems in institutions for communal accommodation (EgU). Legal aspects , Nuremberg, no year
  97. See professional association for food and hospitality (ed.): The Infection Protection Act (IfSG) with a ban on activities and instruction in the food sector , 2017.
  98. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 82.
  99. ^ Rudolf Rengier : The public law approval in criminal law . ZStW 1989, pp. 874-907
  100. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 84 f.
  101. Landeszentrum Gesundheit Nordrhein-Westfalen : Monitoring of activities with pathogens by the health department / the lower health authority. Bielefeld, August 2017
  102. Working with pathogens, Landesdirektion Sachsen, accessed on March 18, 2020.
  103. Poliomyelitis and Vaccines to Eradicate it - Questions and Answers , WHO, Regional Office for Europe, August 4, 2016.
  104. Draft Act to Modernize Epidemiological Surveillance of Communicable Diseases , BT-Drs. 18/10938 of January 23, 2017, pp. 38, 73 ff.
  105. Sabine Diedrich: § 50a IfSG: Poliocontainment now has a legal basis , April 12, 2018.
  106. Martin Schafhausen: Corona virus: Compensation from the state in the case of quarantine, Anwaltsblatt , March 4, 2020.
  107. Holger Schmitz, Carl-Wendelin Neubert: Compensation for company closures unlikely according to the current legal situation March 17, 2020.
  108. See also Holger Wöckel: Fundamentals of German State Liability Law , University of Freiburg, 2006, p. 50 ff. (Compensation claim according to § 55 PolG BW)
  109. ^ Draft of a law for the prevention and control of communicable diseases in humans (Federal Disease Law) , BT-Drs. 1888 of May 27, 1960, p. 27 ff.
  110. Lars Grützner: Corona Virus - Compensation under the Infection Protection Act vs. Obligations to continue payment March 18, 2020.
  111. ^ Draft of a law for the protection of the population in an epidemic situation of national scope , BT-Drs. 19/18111 of March 24, 2020, p. 25 f.
  112. Art. 2 and Art. 7 Paragraph 3 G of March 27, 2020.
  113. Section 69, Paragraph 1 of the Ordinance on Competency of 16 June 2015, GVBl. P. 184
  114. § 8 Paragraph 1 Ordinance on the regulation of responsibilities according to the Infection Protection Act - ZVO-IfSG of November 28, 2000, GV. NRW. 2000 p. 701
  115. RGZ 156, 305
  116. ^ BGH, judgment of February 19, 1953 - III ZR 208/51 = BGHZ 9, 83
  117. Martin Rath: Impfrecht 1953 - 1968: In the Tropic of sacrifice , Legal Tribune Online , June 24, 2018
  118. ^ Draft of a law for the prevention and control of communicable diseases in humans (Federal Disease Law) , BT-Drs. 1888 of May 27, 1960, p. 29.
  119. ^ Draft of a third law amending the Federal Disease Act (draft law of the federal government) , BT-Drs. VI / 1568, p. 6.
  120. ^ Online reporting of side effects Paul Ehrlich Institute, 2018
  121. Angelika Hornig, Renate Klein, Anne Marcic et al .: National vaccination plan. Vaccination in Germany - inventory and need for action , as of January 1, 2012, p. 119.
  122. Edda Grabar: Sick after vaccination Der Tagesspiegel , November 3, 2014
  123. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 88.
  124. Reinhold Rühl: Vaccinations and side effects: Just a little prick , Süddeutsche Zeitung, May 17, 2010.
  125. Cf. draft of a law regulating social compensation law , BT-Drs. 19/13824 of October 9, 2019, p. 180 f.
  126. BGBl. I p. 2652
  127. BGBl. I p. 1012
  128. ^ Draft of a third law amending the Federal Disease Act (BSeuchG) (draft law of the federal government) , BT-Drs. VI / 1568, p. 7.
  129. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 89.
  130. ^ Matthias Cornils: Corona, from a compensation perspective , March 13, 2020.
  131. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 79.
  132. Art. 2 No. 1 of Council Directive 98/83 / EC of November 3, 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption , ABl. No. L 330 of December 5, 1998.
  133. See BayVGH, decision of October 22, 2019 - 20 CS 19.1618
  134. Hygiene requirements for bathrooms and their monitoring. Recommendation of the Federal Environment Agency (UBA) after hearing the Swimming and  Bathing Pool Water Commission of the Federal Ministry of Health (BMG) at the Federal Environment Agency, Federal Health Gazette 2014, pp. 258–279.
  135. Regulations and standards Federal Environment Agency , July 23, 2013
  136. Legal basis for safeguarding and monitoring water quality in public swimming pools , Scientific Services of the German Bundestag (status of December 12, 2017), p. 4 ff.
  137. Swimming and bathing pool water , Federal Ministry of Health , Glossary, October 19, 2018
  138. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 80.
  139. Cf. draft of a law for the prevention and control of communicable diseases in humans (Federal Disease Act) , BT-Drs. 1888 of May 27, 1960, p. 30 ff. On §§ 62–72 BSeuchG
  140. Art. 231 of the Criminal Code, Spreading Human Diseases: Anyone who spreads a dangerous, communicable human disease out of common convictions is punished with imprisonment from one to five years.
  141. Kathleen Kunst: Corona and sanctions for violations of the Infection Protection Act Haufe.de, March 19, 2020.
  142. General administrative regulation for the Infection Protection Act on the cooperation between the health authorities and the medical services of the Bundeswehr (administrative regulation IfSG-Bundeswehr - IfSGBw-VwV) of January 9, 2002, BAnz. P. 1188.
  143. ^ Draft of a law for the reorganization of epidemiological regulations (Seuchenrechtsneuordnungsgesetz - SeuchRNeuG) , BT-Drs. 14/2530 of January 19, 2000, p. 39.
  144. Anja Ettel, Philipp Vetter: The delicate power of the health department. In: welt.de. February 29, 2020, accessed February 29, 2020 .
  145. BGBl. I p. 587
  146. Bund-Länder Agreement: Guidelines against the spread of the coronavirus website of the Federal Government , March 16, 2020.
  147. ↑ The federal government wants to change the Infection Protection Act and take on responsibilities weekly, March 21, 2020.
  148. Draft to amend the Infection Protection Act and other laws FragDenStaat , accessed on March 23, 2020.
  149. Infection Protection Act (IfSG) (MP3 download). April 17, 2020, accessed April 20, 2020 .