With the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic entering its second year, public and private actors alike grow eager to achieve some semblance of normality. In this context, the idea of “vaccination passports” or “immunity certificates” as a means of resuming social and economic activity has been gaining momentum all around the world. This article aims to provide a legal analysis of this initiative through the lens of the proportionality principle. A proportionality test is conducted in order to determine whether the degree of infringement of the human rights implicated is balanced by the potential of a certification system to mitigate the risks of the virus. The results from this analysis show that the targeted aims can be achieved through already existing measures with a lesser impact on civil and fundamental human rights. Moreover, in a context of uncertainty around the immunopathology of COVID-19, the introduction of these certificates presents ethical and scientific challenges, which lead us to believe that this measure is unlikely to play a central role in stopping the spread of the disease, and it could set the pace for a dangerous precedent, allowing for extensive discrimination and exacerbating already existing inequalities and disparities.

中文翻译：

---

将比例原则应用于 COVID-19 证书

随着 SARS-CoV-2 大流行进入第二个年头，公共和私人行为者都渴望实现某种看似正常的状态。在此背景下，“疫苗接种护照”或“免疫证书”作为恢复社会和经济活动的手段的想法在世界范围内获得了发展势头。本文旨在通过比例原则的视角对这一举措进行法律分析。进行比例测试是为了确定所涉及的侵犯人权的程度是否与认证系统减轻病毒风险的潜力相平衡。该分析的结果表明，可以通过现有措施实现目标，但对公民和基本人权的影响较小。而且，