The constitutional order does not provide for a preliminary hierarchical subordination between the rights included in the constitutional text. The Constitution is a system, always imposing a systematic interpretation. Thus, all the fundamental rights protected by the Constitution are in a relationship of mutual integration and it is not possible, therefore, to identify one of them that has absolute prevalence over the others. It is, therefore, in the concrete development of administrative and private action that a balance must be made, case by case, between them.This also happens in the pharmaceutical service sector which involves, among others, Articles 32 and 41 of the Constitution, rules that affect the entire pharmaceutical sector, where it interfaces with a public interlocutor, as guarantor of the pharmaceutical service or as a purchaser of drugs to be administered at public facilities. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the topics connected to the pharmaceutical service, in its meaning of public service provided through and in collaboration with pharmacies, private subjects in charge of a function that is territorially essential. This, considering that, regarding the conditioning of private activity in the health sector, the Court has repeatedly observed that the constitutional protection of the sphere of private autonomy is not absolute and that it is not configurable to have a violation to the freedom of economic initiative where the the application of general limits to its exercise corresponds to social utility, as enshrined in art. 41, second paragraph, of the Constitution, provided that, on the one hand, the identification of the latter does not appear arbitrary and, on the other hand, the interventions of the legislator do not pursue it through manifestly incongruous measures. In this sense, the protection of health (also intended as interest of the community and public interest) must be balanced with other interests, including private autonomy. It is evident that the pharmaceutical service constitutes a scenario of inevitable tensions, among the constitutional interests mentioned above, where a service is provided locally by pharmacies, guaranteeing the realization of the public interest in the protection of health through the dispensing of the means used to correct, restore or maintain the state of wellness.

L'ordinamento costituzionale non prevede una preliminare ed aprioristica subordinazione gerarchica tra i diritti e le tutele incluse nel testo costituzionale. La Costituzione costituisce un sistema, imponendo sempre un’interpretazione sistematica. Così, tutti i diritti fondamentali tutelati dalla Costituzione si trovano in rapporto di integrazione reciproca e non è possibile, pertanto, individuare uno di essi che abbia la prevalenza assoluta sugli altri. È, pertanto, nel concreto svolgersi dell’agire amministrativo e privato che occorre operare un bilanciamento, caso per caso, tra di essi. Così avviene anche nel settore del servizio farmaceutico che coinvolge, tra gli altri, gli articoli 32 e 41 Cost., norme che interessano tutto il settore farmaceutico, ove operatori economici si interfacciano con un interlocutore pubblico, quale garante del servizio farmaceutico o quale acquirente di farmaci da somministrare presso strutture pubbliche. Occorre, quindi, analizzare le problematiche connesse al servizio farmaceutico, nella sua accezione di servizio pubblico erogato per il tramite e in collaborazione con le farmacie, soggetti privati incaricati di una funzione territorialmente imprescindibile. Ciò, considerando che, circa il condizionamento dell’attività privata nel settore sanitario, la Corte ha più volte osservato che la tutela costituzionale della sfera dell’autonomia privata non è assoluta e che non è configurabile una lesione della libertà d’iniziativa economica ove l’apposizione di limiti di ordine generale al suo esercizio corrisponda all’utilità sociale, come sancito dall’art. 41, secondo comma, Cost., purché, per un verso, l’individuazione di quest’ultima non appaia arbitraria e, per altro verso, gli interventi del legislatore non la perseguano mediante misure palesemente incongrue. In questo senso, la tutela della salute (anche intesa come interesse della collettività e interesse pubblico) va bilanciata con gli altri interessi, fra cui l’autonomia privata. È evidente come risulti scenario di inevitabile tensione, tra gli interessi costituzionali sopra citati, il servizio farmaceutico, inteso come servizio erogato sul territorio da farmacie, che garantisce la realizzazione dell’interesse pubblico alla tutela della salute attraverso la dispensazione dei mezzi utilizzati per correggere, ripristinare o conservare la condizione di benessere.

Il servizio farmaceutico tra autonomia privata e vincoli propri del servizio pubblico

Federico Laus
2020

Abstract

The constitutional order does not provide for a preliminary hierarchical subordination between the rights included in the constitutional text. The Constitution is a system, always imposing a systematic interpretation. Thus, all the fundamental rights protected by the Constitution are in a relationship of mutual integration and it is not possible, therefore, to identify one of them that has absolute prevalence over the others. It is, therefore, in the concrete development of administrative and private action that a balance must be made, case by case, between them.This also happens in the pharmaceutical service sector which involves, among others, Articles 32 and 41 of the Constitution, rules that affect the entire pharmaceutical sector, where it interfaces with a public interlocutor, as guarantor of the pharmaceutical service or as a purchaser of drugs to be administered at public facilities. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the topics connected to the pharmaceutical service, in its meaning of public service provided through and in collaboration with pharmacies, private subjects in charge of a function that is territorially essential. This, considering that, regarding the conditioning of private activity in the health sector, the Court has repeatedly observed that the constitutional protection of the sphere of private autonomy is not absolute and that it is not configurable to have a violation to the freedom of economic initiative where the the application of general limits to its exercise corresponds to social utility, as enshrined in art. 41, second paragraph, of the Constitution, provided that, on the one hand, the identification of the latter does not appear arbitrary and, on the other hand, the interventions of the legislator do not pursue it through manifestly incongruous measures. In this sense, the protection of health (also intended as interest of the community and public interest) must be balanced with other interests, including private autonomy. It is evident that the pharmaceutical service constitutes a scenario of inevitable tensions, among the constitutional interests mentioned above, where a service is provided locally by pharmacies, guaranteeing the realization of the public interest in the protection of health through the dispensing of the means used to correct, restore or maintain the state of wellness.
2020
Federico Laus
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/766683
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact