Challenges of Individual Rights with the Right to Public Health During the Corona Pandemic

rights of individuals; in such circumstances, individual rights are in conflict with public rights, and in order to resolve them, indices of preference must be obtained from jurisprudential sources.

The present study has been done by referring to medical articles and legal jurisprudential sources in a library method and by descriptive-analytical method.

Ethical Considerations: 

In all stages of writing the present study, while respecting the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness have been observed.

The most important preventive measures to deal with corona are observing social distance, using masks and injecting vaccines. The non-observance of which leads to endanger the health of other people in the community. On the other hand, the use of them can lead to harm and complications for a person's health. In this case, there is a conflict between the right to individual health and the right to public health. By referring to the the more important and the less important rule and according to the criteria of the rulings and the no-harm rule, the public interest will take precedence over the individual interest. The role of the government in this cases, to maintain public order and ensure public health, is undeniable.

Since controlling the spread of the disease and cutting the chain of infection stops following the observance of health instructions and general vaccination; The precedence of the public interest requires that the observance of the instructions become mandatory; Therefore, the government has a duty to provide the right to public health. Whereas, with the gradual rise of world health standards, coercion has given way to encouraging; It is suggested that the government encourage people to follow the health instructions and vaccinations through public education.