Joelle Grogan
The ‘Power and the COVID-19 Pandemic’ Symposium was hosted by the Verfassungsblog, and supported by Democracy Reporting International under the re:constitution program supported by Stiftung Mercator, and the Horizon-2020 RECONNECT project. Over the course of 12 weeks from 22 February to 15 May 2021, the Symposium reported on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on law and legal systems in 64 countries, accompanied by 11 commentaries on transversal themes including human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
Continue reading >>
Joelle Grogan
Involving over 100 contributors worldwide, the 2021 Power and COVID-19 Pandemic series builds on the 2020 COVID-19 and States of Emergency Symposium to again provide snapshot critical analysis of a world in continued crisis and extended emergency. This final commentary in the 2021 Symposium is divided in two parts: first, an analysis of the impact the pandemic has had on legal systems over the course of the last year; and second, an outlook on how to prepare for future emergencies by building on the lessons of the current one. This is part II.
Continue reading >>
Joelle Grogan
Involving over 100 contributors worldwide, the 2021 Power and COVID-19 Pandemic series builds on the 2020 COVID-19 and States of Emergency Symposium to again provide snapshot critical analysis of a world in continued crisis and extended emergency. This final commentary in the 2021 Symposium is divided in two parts: first, an analysis of the impact the pandemic has had on legal systems over the course of the last year; and second, an outlook on how to prepare for future emergencies by building on the lessons of the current one. This is part I.
Continue reading >>
Christine Bell, Sean Molloy, Asanga Welikala, , Erin Houlihan, Rasha Al Saba, Samrawit Gougsa, Joelle Grogan, Sheila Jasanoff, Stephen Hilgartner, Joshua Castellino
How has COVID-19 impacted upon legal and political systems; minorities and indigenous peoples; and conflict-affected states in transition? This final panel debates themes of trust, equality, conflict and power, and concludes with a commentary by the convenor of the Symposium who will draw together key findings, emergent threats, and reasons for hope.
Continue reading >>
Anna Katharina Mangold, , Wen-Chen Chang, Julinda Beqiraj, Shaheera Syed, Nadia Tariq-Ali, Chun-Yuan Lin, Joelle Grogan
The COVID-19 pandemic has placed extreme strain on legal systems, requiring action in response to fast-changing and complex situation of the pandemic emergency. This panel evaluates state action - and in particular, executive-decision making - in response to the pandemic against the standard of the rule of law, and considers whether this will lead to permanent shifts in legal systems worldwide.
Continue reading >>
Mark A. Graber, Ciara Staunton, Iain Cameron, Anna Jonsson-Cornell, Jerome Amir Singh
Bringing together experts representing states who have adopted divergent attitudes to the role of science in law and decision-making, as well as an examination of vaccination policy, equity and individual choice, this panel considers the complex policy choices, rationales and politics which interplay in decision-making during a pandemic.
Continue reading >>
Tom Gerald Daly, Hans Petter Graver, Michael Meyer-Resende, Dean R Knight, Sabine El Hayek
How has democracy been impacted by over a year of pandemic response and emergency? How have states ensured the democratic accountability of their actions in response to the global health emergency? What lessons can be learned for now, and for the future? This panel examines democratic practices, and highlights the best – and most concerning – developments.
Continue reading >>
Alice Donald, Nerima Were, Tara Imalingat, Manon Julicher, Max Vetzo, Maria Ela L. Atienza, Lucy Moxham
COVID-19 – and state responses to it - present a threat to human rights unparalleled in the contemporary era. At the same time, human rights offer a universal framework which guides decision-makers, ensures accountability for their actions and omissions, and renders visible the structural inequalities which drives the pandemic’s differential impact on certain communities. Looking forward, this panel discusses how human rights can be used to underpin a just and sustainable post-pandemic recovery.
Continue reading >>
Joelle Grogan
Marking the conclusion of the "Power and the COVID-19 Pandemic" Symposium, this webinar series brings together contributors from around the world to discuss the impact of the pandemic on law and governance, drawing on five transversal themes: human rights; democracy; the rule of law; science and decision-making; and the impact of an extended emergency.
Continue reading >>
Sheila Jasanoff, Stephen Hilgartner
The CompCoRe study, an ongoing qualitative comparison of policy responses to Covid-19 in sixteen core countries and two affiliates, begun in April 2020, sought to identify and explain patterns of perceived success and failure in managing this multifaceted crisis. [...] As national and international authorities look to futures beyond Covid-19, a lesson emerging from our study is that they should revisit their institutional processes for integrating scientific and political consensus-building. If free citizens are unable to see how expertise is serving the collective good, they will sooner rebel against the experts than give up their independence. Just as a sound mind is said to require a sound body, so the coronavirus has shown that the credibility of public health expertise depends on the health of the body politic.
Continue reading >>
Jerome Amir Singh
Financial self-interest, fiscal considerations, geopolitics, sovereignty, governance, protectionism, and nationalism are currently dictating COVID-19 vaccine procurement at the macro level. Such structural factors indirectly vitiate autonomy at the grassroots level and run counter to the ideal that individuals should have access to the highest attainable standard of health.
Continue reading >>
Konrad Lachmayer
While the Austrian government´s reactions during the first wave of Covid-19 in spring 2020 are considered to have been successful, disillusionment followed in the fall 2020 with a second wave, for which the government did not seem to have prepared properly. The third period (January to April 2021), on which I will focus in this blog entry, shows a mixed performance of the government.
Continue reading >>
Joelle Grogan
On 16 December 2020, despite rising rates of infection and the widely predicted ‘second wave’ already impacting neighbouring European countries, Prime Minister Boris Johnson mocked the opposition for wanting to ‘cancel Christmas’ by reintroducing nationwide lockdown restrictions. Three days later, a nationwide lockdown in England was introduced (inadvertently mimicking the March 2020 commitment that London had ‘zero prospect’ of lockdown, four days before it was enforced). The lockdown – closing schools, universities and a majority of businesses which were deemed non-essential and prohibiting gatherings of more than two people outdoors from separate households – continued until 12 April 2021 when restrictions began to be lessened through a phased ‘roadmap out of lockdown’. Such political hyperbole by the executive and lax response, followed by sudden U-turn policy making (‘essay crisis’ governance) and severely restrictive measures, have characterised much of the response to the pandemic in the UK.
Continue reading >>
Satang Nabaneh
More than a year after the pandemic was first reported in The Gambia, the state is returning to ordinary processes. Many COVID-related restrictions have been lifted, allowing businesses, markets, schools, restaurants, bars, gyms, cinemas, and nightclubs to resume normal operations, and borders to be open. However, from 8 March 2021, police permits will no longer be issued for music festivals, political events, and other forms of social gatherings. This comes against the backdrop of the country’s limited resources, weak healthcare systems, and ineffective mitigating measures including social distancing, self-isolation, and avoiding public gatherings to prevent further spread of the virus.
Continue reading >>
Arianna Vedaschi
Domestic emergency powers resorted to in the Covid-19 crisis are very different from each other. Is it possible to identify common trends in the comparative scenario? Limiting the scope of the analysis to democratic countries of the Western European area, at least four different tendencies can be identified.
Continue reading >>
Xin He
It is widely agreed that Wuhan, China is the origin of this pandemic. China has also been criticized for its initial mishandling of the outbreak, including local officials’ cover-up, the incompetence of the Chinese Centre for Disease Control (CDC), and the repression of whistle-blowers. In light of what had happened in other countries, however, China’s subsequent responses were nothing short of miraculous. From its lockdown in Wuhan, to the nationwide joint prevention and control system, from border sealing to mass testing and contact tracing, China’s measures were more intense than almost anywhere else in the world.
Continue reading >>
Tom Gerald Daly
What’s the future of the free world? What does the ‘free world’ even mean? Recent reports from leading democracy assessment bodies depict a shrinking democratic atlas that is more fragmented than it has been for decades after a steep decline in every world region.
Continue reading >>
Nerima Were, Allan Maleche, Tara Imalingat
What began as a health crisis quickly morphed into an economic, human rights and governance upheaval. In March 2021, we came full circle as we saw a return to excessive law enforcement in the country on account of the third wave of the virus, which has led to a surge in the number of people testing positive and thrown the country back into a state of disarray as poorly resourced health facilities grapple with the influx of cases.
Continue reading >>
Beatrice Monciunskaite
The government response to COVID-19 in Latvia can be characterised as one of legal caution. Even though successive states of emergency have been used to manage the crisis, adequate parliamentary and judicial oversight has resulted in broadly proportional handling of the pandemic.
Continue reading >>
Nika Ba?i? Selanec
The Croatian government has, much like any other, struggled to find an adequate response to the pandemic of COVID-19. “Dancing with the virus” for the last year entailed introducing, relaxing and re-introducing more or less stringent measures limiting constitutional rights and individual liberties based on epidemiologic developments and political priorities of the day, or season. The measures have ranged from almost a full lockdown in early 2020 when our numbers of infections were amongst the lowest ones in Europe, to a (far too) lenient regime during the tourist season in summer and fall 2020, when the budgetary, economic and political concerns prevailed over the need to address the serious worsening of our epidemiologic parameters. Even today, in the midst of the ‘third wave’, Croatia has quite a moderate set of measures.
Continue reading >>
Maria Ela L. Atienza
The Philippines have one of the longest lockdowns in the world in response to COVID-19. This post reviews the past year, focusing on the main legal and political issues as well as prospects in the country with the second highest total number of COVID-19 cases in Southeast Asia.
Continue reading >>
Rasha Al Saba, Samrawit Gougsa
The disproportionate impact of Covid-19 on minorities and indigenous peoples across the globe has been well documented. Individuals from these communities have been infected at a greater rate, are more likely to die after contracting the disease and now risk being at the back of the queue in national vaccination programmes. Our work has focussed on a number of elements of this phenomenon, including a study of the disproportionate burden of Covid-19 on the most marginalized communities worldwide, and the ways that members from these communities have been pushed into forced labour as a result of the pandemic.
Continue reading >>
,
The coronavirus pandemic posed an unprecedented challenge for the Lithuanian society and the decision-makers. Lithuania’s response to the disease was overseen by two different governments - a populist centre-left government in spring 2020 and a liberal-centre-right coalition formed after the 2020 October parliamentary elections. Since Lithuania’s approach to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic including its legal/constitutional framework has already been addressed, the present analysis will focus on the second quarantine as well as on some overarching issues concerning the rule of law, human rights and good governance.
Continue reading >>
Manon Julicher, Max Vetzo
Along with Covid, the Government’s response, and the growing public unrest, came a continuing string of constitutional questions and developments, that is unlikely to diminish anytime soon. Building on the abovementioned Verfassungsblog post, we will discuss the main constitutional Covid-19 highlights, largely chronologically. Throughout we will pay particular attention to three recurring and interrelated themes: the evolving role of Parliament in shaping the political and legal response to Covid-19, the relevance and varying intensity of judicial control in pandemic times, and the omnipresence of fundamental rights concerns.
Continue reading >>
Wen-Chen Chang, Chun-Yuan Lin
Except for a minor hospital cluster infection in late January 2021, there has been no sign of community spreading. Compared to what has been going on globally with three million death, Taiwan’s control of Covid-19 pandemic is a miraculous success, particularly given its barred access to the World Health Organization and its geographic proximity and economic close ties with China. Notably, this success has been achieved without issuance of any emergency order for lockdowns, shelter in place, business closure, or school suspension. People’s daily lives have been kept without substantial interruption. Because of this, Taiwan’s legal and regulatory responses with the Covid-19 pandemic was praised as the least restrictive in the world.
Continue reading >>
Zemelak Ayele, Yonatan Fessha
Covid-19’s arrival in Ethiopia was especially inopportune, coming as it did when the country was at a political crossroads and the federation under heavy strain as a result of unprecedented intergovernmental disputes. Covid-19 emerged just two years after the three year public protests which began soon after the 2015 elections in which the Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), the ruling coalition until 2019, claimed 100% victory. The public protests led to a political division within the party resulting in the coming to power of Abiy Ahmed who re-configured the party.
Continue reading >>
Dean R Knight
Just over a year since the first outbreak in New Zealand, we cast our eye back and reflect on the government’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Without question, the response is a study in the wonders of modern government, given the magnitude of the threat, the different dimensions of community wellbeing at stake and different parts of government involved in the response. Public health guidance, clinical health care, economic support and stimulus, social welfare and support, border security and surveillance. The list goes on....
Continue reading >>
Joelle Grogan, Julinda Beqiraj
The COVID-19 pandemic has presented an extreme strain on legal systems worldwide, as they struggled to adapt existing legislative frameworks, administrative functions, and executive decision-making to the fast-changing and complex situation of the pandemic emergency. The measures adopted worldwide, including mandates in the form of lockdowns and restrictions on gatherings, closures of educational and business institutions, have been not only among the most restrictive limitations on the rights of the majority of global population but also long lasting, with uncertain ending.
Continue reading >>
Hans Petter Graver
One year into the pandemic it is necessary to take stock of what has been achieved by the measures that have been implemented, and to reflect on their costs. Phrased differently, how successful have the authorities been in their endeavors to contain and control the spread of COVID-19? And from a legal point of view, what are the constitutional and cultural legacies of a year of deploying war-like measures against the virus? In this contribution to the symposium, I revisit the Norwegian COVID-19 response. In particular, I begin to unpack the narrative of success and its impact on deliberative democratic discourse. I do this by way of taking stock of the response through the lens of three rule of law indicators, namely the application of the principle of legality, the degree of parliamentary control, and adherence to open and democratic principles of rule-making.
Continue reading >>
Ahmed Ellaboudy
Indeed, from the very outset, Egypt’s attitude concerning the management of the pandemic crisis was the adoption of the minimum possible actions, which does not harm the state economic plan, nor change the way the system functions. From a formalist point of view, Egypt has existed in a permanent state of emergency since 2017, and as a consequence, no specific legal response was adopted by the state which might alter the regular decision-making process or power arrangements between different branches. The desire of presenting an image to the public that the situation is under control was a crucial factor in Egypt's political, legal, and economic response to the COVID-19 crisis.
Continue reading >>
Mark A. Graber
COVID revealed the extent to which attacks on evidence-based politics are part and parcel of the right-wing populist challenge to constitutional democracy in the United States and elsewhere. Right-wing populism challenges constitutional commitments to rule of law and basic liberal freedoms, as such strongmen as Erdogan. Orban and Maduro seize control of courts and persecute dissidents. Populist responses to the pandemic in the United States raise equally important questions about the constitutional commitments to science that are as important to constitutional democracy as the rule of law.
Continue reading >>
Tamar Hostovsky Brandes
Israel’s response to the pandemic took place in an unstable and highly polarized political climate. This affected the decisions taken in several ways. First, throughout the crisis, it was difficult to achieve agreement within the government on required actions. In addition, decisions often reflected political rather than professional considerations, a problem that was exacerbated by the instability of the coalition. The prospect of additional elections also effected the political will to enforce restrictions, in particular in the Ultra-Orthodox sector, as Ultra-Orthodox parties are perceived by Netanyahu as necessary partners in any government coalition.
Continue reading >>
It has now been a year since the beginning of this prolonged pandemic, the state of emergency (decreed on March 15, 2020 and extended throughout this entire time), the various levels of confinement and restrictions on civil liberties such as freedom of movement and the right of assembly, and a severe economic recession. At this point, our balance sheet is in the red. This is not only because we reached an official death toll of 52,000 and some 1.5 million cases of infection by March of this year, but also because there has been a severe weakening of institutions, which would explain—in part—why Peru is one of the countries in Latin America that has been hardest hit by COVID-19.
Continue reading >>
Alice Donald, Philip Leach
We anticipated a year ago that the pandemic, and state responses to it, presented both threats and opportunities in relation to the full panoply of human rights—civil, political, economic, social and cultural. Our proposition was that, as Scheinin ventures, “human rights do not present a barrier to decisive action to contain the virus”. Rather, they offer a universal frame of reference in the context of COVID-19—guiding national authorities as they balance competing interests and priorities; ensuring public accountability for their actions and omissions; and rendering visible the structural injustices that have driven the contagion’s disproportionate impact on certain communities. A year on, these arguments are all the starker.
Continue reading >>
Shaheera Syed, Nadia Tariq-Ali
The ‘lives versus livelihood’ conundrum in Pakistan is emblematic of the difficulties that accompany the balancing of conflicting rights in transitioning democracies. From testing the ability of various tiers of the government machinery to work together to keeping the economy afloat as the country faced lockdowns, Pakistan deeply felt the onset of the burden of disease. The country’s journey through the pandemic was shrouded in deep political contestations over power struggle between the provinces and the centre. As the crisis deepened in mid-2020, the social policies for pandemic response became the site for centralising authority; where trade-offs were made between fundamental rights and well-being of citizens to draw political mileage and cementing the narrative of the centre.
Continue reading >>
Seokmin Lee, Tae-Ho Kim
South Korea has reduced the significant number of new confirmed COVID-19 cases without ordering stringent restrictions, nor locking down regions and causing severe economic damage. South Korea was able to slow down the spread of COVID-19 along with the government’s quick reaction to the disease. The government has been implementing nationwide free public testing programs. The KCDC in the government tracked all the confirmed cases’ geographic footprints and publicized the information to the people via online websites and mobile texts. Local cities opened up an innovative ‘drive-through’ testing area, which became a model followed by other countries. The civil society has also generally followed the guidelines provided by government, including using medical face masks and adapting to ‘social-distancing.
Continue reading >>
Anna Katharina Mangold
In January 2020, information about a highly contagious virus in Wuhan started to get public attention in Germany. Initially, as can be expected in times of crisis, it was mostly the executive that took action. Due to federal competence allocation, first acted the local authorities in their capacity as health authorities, soon joined by the governments of the federal states (Länder) and the federal government. By now, legislative amendments have formed a massive body of Corona legislation, covering various aspects of economic and social life in Germany. The debate has mainly focused on questions of vertical and horizontal separation of powers, the role of expertise in the Covid response, and restrictions of fundamental rights as adjudicated by courts.
Continue reading >>
This blogpost analyses the Czech situation from the perspective of the rule of law requirements and identifies two main deficiencies: a significant and long-lasting shift of power to the executive, and an ostentatious lack of reasoning of the executive crisis measures. Fortunately, these ‘two tales of executive arrogance’ have been somewhat counterweighed by the legislature and the judiciary.
Continue reading >>
Considering the political scenario, this article will highlight that the government's management of the pandemic has been ill-timed; it has not been holistic but rather aimed at providing temporary solutions without alleviating the underlying problems of the Ecuadorian population and that the control of the President's exceptional powers has been assumed mainly by the Constitutional Court of Ecuador and not by the legislature.
Continue reading >>
This article first analyses the various dimensions of the public health and human rights crisis, in order to identify, secondly, the breadth of the efforts that need to be made for a short- and long-term human rights-based response to COVID-19.
Continue reading >>
Bianca Selejan-Gutan
The year 2020 was a difficult one for Romania, as for the whole world, because of the Covid-19 crisis which overlapped with other local crises of political, legal and social natures. The country’s response to the Covid-19 challenges was rendered even more difficult and incoherent by these crises. In February-March 2020, the government and the President were looking for a solution in order to initiate the procedure for early elections and at the very first moments of the pandemic the country had an interim government after a motion of censure had passed.
Continue reading >>
Ridwanul Hoque
Government authorities and political leaders take huge pride in claiming that Bangladesh has been one of the most successful countries to tackle COVID-19, with the least number of deaths compared with the size of its population (165 million). In reality, the COVID-situation and Bangladesh’s responses to the crisis are much different than the rosy picture that is often drawn.
Continue reading >>
Jakub Jaraczewski
This post will cover four core areas of legal concern regarding the Polish response to COVID-19 across the last few months. First of them is the continued issue of legality of the measures used. Second is the issue of transparency and clarity of the measures employed with a particular look at the issue of exiting the emergency. Third is the matter of judicial oversight and the role of Polish courts during the pandemic. Fourth issue pertains to the convergence between the challenges brought about by the pandemic and the continued backsliding of the rule of law and erosion of human rights in Poland.
Continue reading >>
Luwie Ganeshathasan
In the midst of this public health emergency, Sri Lanka’s legal system has contributed little if anything to Sri Lanka’s response to Covid-19 since March 2020. The legal system has been expected to and in a large part has in fact been “kept out of the way” of the political actors. In this post I will provide an overview of the GoSL’s legal and political response to Covid-19 and will highlight the implications of key actions on the rule of law and democratic governance. I will thereafter briefly capture the outlook for 2021.
Continue reading >>
Kristian Cedervall Lauta
On 11th March 2020 the Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen found herself in a historic moment. The infection numbers in Denmark had dramatically increased within the last 24 hours - from just 157 infected in total on the 10th of March to 514 on March 11th – and a, now well-documented, disagreement between the health authorities and the government on the overall strategy had forced the hand of the Prime Minister to take decisive action. Dressed all in black, the prime minister ceremonially opened the press conference with the, now famous, words: “What I will tell you tonight, will have major implications for all Danes”. Indeed, almost one year from the Prime minister’s public prophecy, we can conclude - it did.
Continue reading >>
Ciara Staunton
COVID-19 is our first digital pandemic. An effective response to COVID-19 is reliant on access to data that can be used to identify COVID-19 hotspots, guide national and localised responses, as well as be used in research aimed at developing COVID-19 diagnostics, therapies and vaccines. This digital pandemic has thus seen a shift in our data practices. “Open science” and the rapid data sharing of the results of clinical trials, observational studies, operational research, routine surveillance, information on the virus and its genetic sequences, as well as the monitoring of disease control programmes has been pushed to a new level.
Continue reading >>
Samo Bardutzky,
Slovenia had a very different experience in the first and the second wave of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. In the first wave, the number of infections and deaths per capita has been comparatively low and Slovenia was even identified as a “corona success story”. The second wave, however, has propelled Slovenia into the highest ranks of mortality per capita globally with the total of 162 deaths per 100,000 people from the beginning of the pandemic until 25 January 2021. The Government introduced stringent measures in Autumn 2020, including the complete ban on assembly and sale of non-essential items, the closure of educational institutions, a strict 9 pm - 6 am curfew, and the prohibition of movement across municipal borders.
Continue reading >>
Marie-Laure Basilien-Gainche
To cope with the COVID-19 crisis, the French Parliament adopted the Act n° 2020-290 creating a new regime of exception: the state of health emergency. It is concerning as it confers more powers and large leeway to the executive branch than the traditional state of security emergency, and as it offers the opportunity to restrict widely rights and liberties with almost no checks and balances.
Continue reading >>
Oran Doyle
In Ireland, it is not constitutionally permissible to declare an emergency in response to COVID-19. The legal response, therefore, has been mounted within the normal constitutional framework. This has consisted of five primary statutes that (a) empower the Minister for Health to make regulations (secondary legislation) imposing restrictions to control the pandemic and (b) establish enforcement powers that the Minister for Health can attach to particular restrictions. By early March 2021, the Minister had made 74 sets of regulations imposing restrictions.
Continue reading >>
, Emre Turkut
Ever since the first officially reported COVID-19 case in the country in March in 2020, Turkey, like most of the world, has taken measures to control the pandemic. The measures taken by Turkey included limitations on freedom of movement, closing schools and moving to online teaching at schools as and universities, restrictions on business opening hours, cessation of prison and detention visits, prohibition of resignation for healthcare staff, and, more stringently, the introduction of curfews.
Continue reading >>
Abdurrachman Satrio, Mohammad Ibrahim
It has been a year since the first Covid-19 case was confirmed in Indonesia, in early March 2020. At that time, the Indonesian government underestimated the dangers of Covid-19, which proved fatal since the virus continued to spread gradually to all Indonesian provinces within a month. At the time of writing, Indonesia is the country with the highest number of positive cases in Southeast Asia with 1,419,455, even the Covid-19 death rate in Indonesia is among the highest in the world.
Continue reading >>
Sean Molloy, Christine Bell, Asanga Welikala, Erin Houlihan,
This post looks at emergency law responses to the Covid-19 pandemic in conflict-affected states in transition. While some type of emergency response to Covid-19 has been used in most states, we suggest that conflict ‘fault lines’ can mean that emergency law responses have a capacity to undermine transitions.
Continue reading >>
Marzieh Tofighi Darian
As of January 26, 2021, Iran has reported a total of 57,481 death and more than 1,300,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19, making it the hardest-hit country in the Middle East. After days of denial, Iranian officials finally confirmed the first COVID-19 related death on February 19, 2020. The government’s response in the early days of the pandemic was a preview of what was to come: refusing to quarantine the city of Qom, the first epicenter of COVID in Iran; rejecting the call to postpone the Parliamentary elections; and continuing to receive flights from China, all resulting in the quick spread of the virus across the country.
Continue reading >>
Merilin Kiviorg,
The first coronavirus infection in Estonia was diagnosed on 27 February 2020. Immediately, some steps were taken by the Government to deal with the rapidly evolving and changing situation, including placing some restrictions on freedom of movement especially on people in quarantine. To further tackle the emerging crisis the Government established a state of emergency on Estonian territory. This was done by Order No. 76 of 12 March 2020. The numbers of infected in spring 2020 were low in comparison with the numbers of infected during the second wave in autumn-winter 2020. On the day when the emergency situation was declared there were only 27 COVID-19 positive people.
Continue reading >>
Ciara Staunton, Melodie Labuschaigne
On 15 March 2020 with only 61 cases and 0 deaths recorded, President Ramaphosa quickly decided that swift action was required and declared a state of disaster. Despite this quick action, South Africa has recorded the highest number of cases in Africa. This post will consider whether its response has been legitimate, proportionate and subject to appropriate judicial oversight.
Continue reading >>
A year ago, the first lockdowns were introduced in Europe. Since then, European governments have been busy introducing COVID-19 containment measures, including social distancing rules and mask mandates. For two months, they have been vaccinating the people. Ostensibly, the EU countries have taken similar steps. This piece provides a sketch of how the Hungarian government has handled the pandemic.
Continue reading >>
Sabine El Hayek
Lebanon is facing an unprecedented crisis due to the continuous political turmoil and the unfolding economic and financial meltdown, exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic. This situation was further aggravated by the devastating 4 August explosion of 2,750 tonnes of Ammonium Nitrate at the port of Beirut that killed over 200 people, injured more than 7,000 and left thousands of residents without a roof. To date, justice has not been served, and no one has been held accountable. The combined impact of these crushing tragedies in addition to the rampant inflation is catastrophic on citizens’ livelihoods.
Continue reading >>
Maaike De Ridder
As Covid-19 started to make its way onto Belgian territory, the Belgian federal government found itself in the midst of political disorder and negotiations to form a government after the May 2019 elections. Up until March 2020, the competent authority to decide on Covid measures was a caretaker minority government (Regering Wilmès I). But, after the first big outburst of cases in Belgium, the government formation accelerated. Nine political parties made a deal to give the resigning minority government full authority to combat the virus and its economic and social ramifications by a motion of confidence (Regering Wilmès II).
Continue reading >>
At the beginning of this pandemic in Iceland, the sense of urgency, uncertainty, and necessity seemed to be front and centre. New and far-reaching restrictions were seen, at least by some, as ‘a necessary evil’ in order to protect us from a new and, in a sense, invisible threat. The learning curve for the government was also steep. According to our law, the government had a wide discretion to address this novel situation. Less than a year later, this is still true to a certain extent. However, whereas the necessity to act was predominant in the first stages of the pandemic, questions of constitutionality and legality are now moving to the forefront.
Continue reading >>
Max Steuer
In spring 2020, Slovakia was praised for minimizing the instances of the COVID-19 pandemic. By early 2021, however, with Slovakia among the top five countries with the highest increase of COVID-19-induced death cases, a very different picture has emerged, highlighting the costs of neglecting democracy considerations (encompassing human rights and the rule of law) by the executive in particular.
Continue reading >>
Paul Daly
As of early 2021, the COVID-19 pandemic continues to rage across Canada. These are dark days. Although the arrival of vaccines suggests light will soon appear at the end of the tunnel, Canada is a long way from the end of its COVID-19 crisis.
In this blog, I hope to illuminate readers, through the lens of pandemic-related public law litigation, about how Canada has responded to COVID-19.
Continue reading >>
Cristina Fasone
The activity of the coalition Government between the Five Star Movement (5SM), the Democratic Party and other centre-left junior allies to tackle COVID-19 has been praised by some and severely criticized by others. Looking back at this first year of pandemic, a crucial problem of the Italian management of the disease and the related economic and social crises has been the lack of loyal cooperation; a principle entrenched into the Constitution (Art. 120, second para, Const.), with regard to the relationship amongst the different levels of government.
Continue reading >>
Esteban Hoyos-Ceballos,
It has been a year now since a discussion began about the profound changes that the arrival of the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic could bring to our constitutional systems. This year has confirmed that the bad omens of the early days of the pandemic were well justified. The system has been put through a severe stress test and, unfortunately, we cannot say that it has been up to the challenge. This blog post seeks to briefly review the main events that have marked the institutional response to the pandemic and the implications that this response has had for the Colombian constitutional system.
Continue reading >>
Radosveta Vassileva
In a prior article, I explained how the Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borissov was using the COVID-19 emergency in spring 2020 as an opportunity to implement measures curtailing fundamental rights and solidifying his autocracy. Subsequently, Borissov’s GERB party enacted questionable amendments to the Law on Health permitting the executive to usurp powers traditionally conferred onto Parliament in Bulgaria’s constitutional order.
Continue reading >>
Roman Petrov, Bohdan Bernatskyi
The pandemic has exposed all the weaknesses and shortcomings of the Ukrainian health protection system, which has been on a periphery of the national reforms agenda for many years. In many regards, the Ukrainian way to protect the population against infectious diseases remains ineffective and fragmented and based of outdated Soviet-time approaches and methods. To date, Ukraine is one of the unfortunate leaders among European countries in confirmed Covid-19 cases and coronavirus death tolls. There is still no clear national strategy on how to prevent the further spread of Covid-19 in Ukraine is in place. The President of Ukraine and the Ministry of Health of Ukraine forecasted the terms of vaccination under the WHO COVAX initiative. However, detailed arrangements are far from being in place.
Continue reading >>
Teresa Violante, Rui T. Lanceiro
Following an initial comparatively successful handling of the pandemic, infection numbers began increasing consistently after September in Portugal and reached an alarming rate at the beginning of 2021. A second lockdown started on January 14, 2021, with record infection and mortality rates and the National Health Service near breakdown. On 21 January, the measures were tightened and included the closure of schools and universities. A year later, Portugal is back to square one, and, as the failure to control the growth of the pandemic seems evident, medical and moral despair dominate. The impact of the restrictions on the freedom of movement contributed to a decline in the country’s overall score of The Economist’s Democracy Index 2020, that now qualifies it as a “democracy with flaws”.
Continue reading >>
Pui-yin Lo
Hong Kong was one of the front urban regions that recorded COVID-19 cases in early 2020. One year later, there were recorded over 11,000 confirmed cases and 200 deaths. At the time of writing, this Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China is struggling with the fourth wave of infections, which is the most virulent thus far, due to the combination of community spread initiated a cluster of dancing instructors and students, and the infiltration of the coronavirus, finally, into the least hygienic environs of the built-up areas.
Continue reading >>
Edoardo Stoppioni
With the end of the first wave of COVID-19, the state of crisis was ended in June 2020 in Luxembourg. But its problematic features seem to have remained in the legislative action tackling the second wave. Two main differences appear between the legal approach adopted in March and the current one.
Continue reading >>
Ratna Rueban Balasubramaniam
The COVID-19 pandemic occasioned a de facto worldwide state of exception. In Malaysia, the beginning of the pandemic would coincide with political turmoil. In 2018, a democratic reformist government surprisingly rose to power after unexpectedly winning the general election. The victory ended six decades of ethnocratic and authoritarian rule under the United Malay National Organization (“UMNO”), a Malay nationalist party committed to a political doctrine of ethnic “Malay Dominance.” However, in March 2020, just as the WHO declared a global pandemic, a series of political machinations brought down the reformist government.
Continue reading >>
Constantinos Kombos
The outbreak of COVID-19 caught the Cypriot legal order unprepared as regards the effective response in containing the spread of the virus. Contrary to the approach of other European states that declared a state of emergency, Cyprus opted for the adoption of executive measures based on pre-existing, primary legislation. In the absence of any contemporary legislation and with the conscious decision not to table legislation, the executive employed the provisions of colonial legislation, namely the Quarantine Law (Cap. 260) which was enacted in 1932 by the British. The said law intended to regulate the imposition of quarantine and provided for the prevention in the then colony of dangerous infectious diseases. Following the independence of Cyprus in 1960, colonial legislation – including Cap. 260 – remained in effect, as per article 188 of the Cypriot Constitution, subject to compliance with constitutional provisions.
Continue reading >>
Kirill Koroteev
As the end of the year 2020 approached, the Vice-President of the French Conseil d’État Bruno Lasserre commented on one line of the case-law that appeared in the pandemic year: urgent application judges had to decide on the legality of rules found in press-releases and interviews by first deciphering legal rules and their hierarchy from those texts. This reflected exactly my experience as a practitioner in 2020 Russia: advising a client having weighed whether a blog of the Speaker of the Moscow City Duma carried more authority than a televised interview of the Moscow Mayor.
Continue reading >>
Felix Uhlmann, Odile Ammann
In our earlier blog contributions, we analysed whether the Swiss federal government (the Federal Council) acted within the bounds of the Swiss Constitution (hereinafter: Cst.) when enacting emergency ordinances in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. We criticised the self-suspension of Parliament in March 2020, and we had a first glance at the interaction between the Confederation and the cantons. We are now, hopefully, halfway through the pandemic, which justifies a look back and a look into the future, especially into the ongoing vaccination efforts.
Continue reading >>
Thulasi K. Raj
In the recent global history of constitutional democracies, it is difficult to name a single crisis that has plagued them simultaneously, until the COVID-19 pandemic. The calamity brought in by the virus was universal. For governments, it presented an opportunity for crisis management without compromising rights guarantees. Some countries have marginally succeeded in this test while in others, concerns of democratic decline were amplified. Three features defined the Indian response to COVID-19: lack of transparency, executive monopoly and suppression of dissent.
Continue reading >>
Alicia Cebada Romero, Elvira Dominguez Redondo
The Spanish response to the waves of the COVID-19 pandemic that have affected the territory has so far largely relied on emergency powers. The measures were adopted on the basis of the pre-existing legal framework provided in article 116 of the Constitution and its legislative development, Ley Orgánica 4/1981 on state of alarm, exception and siege, adopted on 1 June 1981 (henceforth LO 4/1981). As explained below, two different approaches have characterised the response to the first and second wave. However, both have their legal basis on the same norms and are based on the same legal category, i.e., the state of alarm ('estado de alarma').
Continue reading >>
Eugenio Velasco
Close to a year since its first confirmed case of COVID-19, several indicators place Mexico among the countries that have suffered the worst effects of the pandemic. This post offers a critical overview of the governmental responses to the outbreak. It begins by describing the actions taken by officials of the different branches and levels of government. This is followed by an assessment of the many omissions and deficiencies that have characterized the response of the Federal Executive. Lastly, it closes by offering an outlook for 2021.
Continue reading >>
George Karavokyris
In the first wave of the pandemic (March-June 2020) Greece has been widely praised for having taken all necessary actions to contain effectively the spread of the virus. Despite the reasonable concerns, a consensus among scholars about the constitutionality of harsh restrictions on rights was reached, along with a broad social acceptance, due to the priority of health public interest and the exceptional character of the measures. Set by an emergency mechanism, the framework of the “crisis-law” remains alive and binding, while the country is possibly entering, after the second and more lethal spike (November-January), the third wave of Covid-19.
Continue reading >>
, Thomas Bustamante, Joelle Grogan, Jakub Jaraczewski, Thulasi K. Raj, Martin Scheinin
Marking the launch of the 2021 "Power and the COVID-19 Pandemic" Symposium, this webinar will bring together five contributors to discuss the impact of the pandemic on legal systems globally, and offer initial assessments for the rule of law, democracy, and human rights.
Continue reading >>
Shirin Chua, Jaclyn L. Neo
The Covid-19 pandemic has tested the legal, political, economic and public health systems of countries all over the world, and Singapore – particularly as it found itself having to hold a general election in the middle of the pandemic – is no exception. However, it does seem that the pandemic has created opportunities for consolidation of democracy in Singapore as a result of increased citizen-state interactions during this time.
Continue reading >>
Iain Cameron, Anna Jonsson-Cornell
The Swedish political and legal response to the Covid-19 pandemic is best described as soft in terms of the character of the measures applied, and decentralized in terms of the division of powers and responsibilities. Swedish constitutional law does not provide for a state of emergency in a peace time crisis, such as a pandemic. Instead, the principle of statutory anticipation is used, which means that ordinary laws (with, in some cases, special provisions which can be activated) apply also in a time of crisis, e.g. the Public Order Act (POA), which allows the government to restrict the number of participants in public meetings or organized public events. Where these powers are deemed to be insufficient, the legislative procedure should be sufficiently flexible to allow new powers to be added relatively speedily. However, the events in 2020 showed that this approach suffers from several deficiencies.
Continue reading >>
Khemthong Tonsakulrungruang, Rawin Leelapatana
COVID-19 posed one of the biggest challenges to the government of Prayuth Chan-ocha, the former junta leader and current prime minister. He successfully controlled the first round of pandemic, which spiked in mid-March by enforcing disproportionately harsh measures for unnecessarily prolonged period. [...] This article discusses the government’s failure to utilize emergency power to manage COVID-19 and assesses adverse effects brought about by the prolonged state of emergency.
Continue reading >>
Martin Scheinin
In mid-April 2020 Verfassungsblog published my first take on Finland’s response to COVID-19, under the characterisation 'Best Practice and Problems'. Into February 2021, Finland has remained one of the few European champions in combating the epidemic, with 9,423 cases and 131 deaths (both per one million inhabitants and by 18 February 2021). Notably, Finland’s success has not followed from strict ‘draconian’ measures but from a combination of factors that include at least geographical location; cultural patterns that support physical distancing and even isolation; a well-functioning healthcare system; a good level of compliance; comparatively good levels of vitamin D; and sheer luck which would be related to the first factor, geographical location.
Continue reading >>
Emilio Peluso Neder Meyer, Thomas Bustamante
In the first half of January 2021, Brazil had already counted more than 200,000 deaths and 8 million people diagnosed with COVID-19. Throughout 2020, the responses from the federal government, which should have taken on a coordination role considering the federalised National Health Service (SUS, Sistema Único de Saúde), were confusing and inefficient. Doubts and scepticism spread by the federal executive undermined the work of governors and mayors and, mirroring the American example, contributed to increase the number of cases and casualties.
Continue reading >>
Marco Rizzi, Tamara Tulich
Australia’s legal and political response to the outbreak of COVID-19 has been marked by the formation of a new intergovernmental forum, the National Cabinet, to lead a coordinated national response to the pandemic, and the declaration of successive states of emergency at the federal and state levels activating extraordinary executive powers, including limitations on movement and border closures. Australia’s response has, to date, resulted in the successful curtailment of community transmission of COVID-19 in Australian States and Territories. However, the response to the pandemic has also involved the removal of existing mechanisms of executive accountability, suspensions of Parliament and little parliamentary scrutiny or other oversight of executive action. These democratic deficits present fresh challenges for Australia going forward, particularly as the National Cabinet structure becomes permanent and the states of emergency endure for the foreseeable future.
Continue reading >>
Joelle Grogan
One year on how has the COVID-19 pandemic affected the law, and the way states govern? Should we be concerned about the ongoing use of emergency powers? How can we look forward to what lies ahead? Convened by Joelle Grogan, this Symposium is hosted by the Verfassungsblog and supported by Democracy Reporting International and the Horizon-2020 RECONNECT project.
Continue reading >>
Democracy Reporting International (DRI) works to improve public understanding of the rule of law in the EU as part of the re:constitution programme funded by Stiftung Mercator.
