[Prioritization of health resources in contexts of scarcity. SESPAS Report 2022]. / Priorización de recursos sanitarios en contextos de escasez. Informe SESPAS 2022.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a clinical challenge, but also a legal and bioethical one. These three fundamental pillars are developed in the approach to prioritizing health resources in pandemic, clinical criteria, corresponding legal framework and applicable ethical principles. Initially, clinical criteria were applied to identify patients with the best survival prognosis, combining a clinical evaluation and the use of short-term and long-term prognostic variables. But the decision to prioritize the care of one patient over another has a legal-political burden, which poses a risk of falling into discrimination since fundamental rights are at stake. The prioritization criteria must be based on principles that reflect as a vehicle philosophy that which we have constitutionally assumed as a social and democratic State of Law, which did not respond to utilitarianism but to personalism. Any philosophy of resource distribution must bear in mind the scientific and constitutional perspective and, with them, those of fundamental rights and bioethical principles. In the prioritization of resources, ethical principles must be consolidated such as respect for the human dignity, the principle of necessity (equal need, equal access to the resource), the principle of equity (which advises prioritizing the most vulnerable population groups), transparency (fundamental in society's trust) and the principle of reciprocity (which requires protecting the sectors of the population that take more risks), among others.

[Vulnerability and Health Care. Law and Medical Protocols]. / Vulnerabilidad y Atención Sanitaria: Derecho y Protocolos Médicos.

The article deals with the analysis of the criteria for the allocation of scarce health resources during the pandemic produced by the COVID 19 virus in Spain. It critically analyses the absence of a legal-constitutional perspective in the elaboration of such criteria and suggests the incorporation of the criterion of equity as a guarantee of the effective exercise of the constitutional right to health protection by vulnerable persons.

[Towards an universal biolaw? Biolaw in action and funcionalization of human life's value]. / ¿Hacia un bioderecho universal? Bioderecho en acción y funcionalización del valor de la vida humana.

The paper analyzes the question of the universal biolaw from the point of view of the biojuridical praxis. The main problems concerning life's protection are found in the process of interpretation and re-creation of the norms (not in their literal texts) regulating the right to life and new rights, as personal autonomy. But it is also at this sphere where the possibilities of an universal biolaw founded on the funcionalization of the human life value are to be found.

[The Brüstle v. Greenpeace case and the end of pre-implantation embryos discrimination]. / El Caso Brüstle V. Greenpeace y el Final de la Discriminación de los Embriones Preimplantatorios.

In October 2011 the Court of Justice of the European Union pronounced the sentence in the case Brüstle v. Greenpeace. This sentence resolves the preliminary ruling interposed by the Bundesgerichtshof. The object of the preliminary ruling was the interpretation of the expression "human embryos", on 44/98/CE Guideline, in order to resolve the litigation between Brüstle, a German neurobiologist, and Greenpeace. Brüstle have patented a process for obtaining stem cells using cells originally extracted from human embryos, Greenpeace have filed a lawsuit against this patent. The article analyzes the meaning of this sentence in the light of the discrimination of the pre-implantation embryos in Spanish law. The content of the Biopatent Guideline, the Opinions of the European Group on Ethics of Science and New Technologies related to it, the EUJC verdict and the Conclusions of the General Advocate are analyzed. We will pay special attention to the final verdict given on November 27, 2012, by the German Federal Court of Justice. The paper also considers the repercussion of Brüstle case at the European level, examining the activity of the European Parliament, in the frame of the discussion of the program Horizon 2020, and the citizen's initiative "One of us". At the Spanish level, the paper underlines the need to reform the laws of Human Assisted Reproduction and of Biomedical Investigation.