14 April 2020
Not a Safe Place?
In an unprecedented move, the Italian government has declared Italy’s ports “unsafe” due to the COVID-19-pandemic. It did so by issuing an executive decree late Tuesday last week, seemingly in response to the rescue of 150 shipwrecked by the Sea-Eye’s Alan Kurdi. This is not the first time that the Italian government has used decrees to close its borders for sea-rescue ships. However, given the extraordinary circumstances of this case in the midst of the on-going Corona-crisis and the novel argument made by the Italian government, the decision warrants closer examination. Continue reading >>
0 
14 April 2020
The Coronavirus Crisis-Law in Greece: A (Constitutional) Matter of Life and Death
Each time a crisis emerges, the law is entitled to seize the exceptional moment and contain it, within the limits of democracy and the rule of law. Legal normality, as a vague standard, is usually redefined by the legislator and the courts and rapidly adjusted to reality. The constitutional value of public interest comes into conflict with civil liberties and scholars begin to question the law. The saga of the (Greek) coronavirus crisis-law is, like everywhere, utterly reduced to the proportionality of the exceptional measures of the (Greek) State, but its moral and political implications seem far broader and ambiguous. Continue reading >>
0
14 April 2020
Fear of Unaccountability vs Fear of a Pandemic: COVID-19 in Hong Kong
When news began to circulate about a novel virus in December 2019, Hong Kong was in the midst of protests that had been going on for months. There were (and continue to be) widespread demands for accountability and democracy, accompanied by a significant degree of public distrust and dissatisfaction towards the Government. Pertinently, the Government had just invoked hugely controversial emergency powers to quell the protests. Hong Kong was also one of the hardest-hit regions during the SARS epidemic 17 years ago, and there was a collective determination not to repeat the tragedy. Continue reading >>
0
14 April 2020
Versammlungsfreiheit in der Krise
Die fundamentale Bedeutung der Versammlungsfreiheit für den demokratischen Rechtsstaat, auch unter den Bedingungen der Corona-Pandemie, wird von den Verwaltungsgerichten bisher nicht verteidigt. In Zeiten, in denen eine schonende Abwägung zwischen Grundrechten und eine erhöhte Sensibilität für eine schleichende Grundrechtserosion notwendig ist, wird, anstatt der Versammlungsfreiheit zu ihrer Entfaltung zu verhelfen, die Bedrohung des Lebens von Gerichten als so überragend gewertet, dass für Versammlungen aktuell kein verwaltungsgerichtlicher Schutz zu erreichen ist. Dies ist fatal, denn die Versammlungsfreiheit ist kein Schönwetter-Grundrecht, sondern sie ist gerade bei weitreichenden Entscheidungen in Krisenzeiten für die Demokratie unentbehrlich. Continue reading >>13 April 2020
Staatliche Krisenreaktionen und die unteilbare Umwelt für den Grundrechtsgebrauch
Sich in einer Pandemielage gegen Beschränkungen zu entscheiden, erscheint grundrechtlich unverdächtig. Doch wäre es das tatsächlich? Im Folgenden werden zwei unterschiedliche Szenarien einer solchen Entscheidung vorgestellt und es wird ein näherer Blick auf die Folgen für den individuellen Grundrechtsgebrauch geworfen. Es zeigen sich Grundrechtsfragen, die im Ergebnis auch für die Beurteilung des beschränkenden Staates aufgeworfen sind. Continue reading >>13 April 2020
Verhältnismäßigkeit mit der Holzhammermethode
Für viele ist Grundrechtseingriff im Kampf gegen die Corona-Pandemie nachvollziehbar angesichts der Vorstellung von Masseninfektionen in Pflege- oder Rehaeinrichtungen, von zu Triage gezwungenen Ärzt*innen und einem komplett überforderten Gesundheitssystems. Beeindruckt davon zeigen sich offenkundig auch die Gerichte, die einen Eilantrag nach dem anderen ablehnen unter Verweis auf legitime Zielsetzungen, auf die Einschätzungsprärogative staatlicher Akteure und vor allem auf die Folgenabschätzung, die bisher stets zu Ungunsten der Antragsteller*innen ausfiel. Exemplarisch sei hier die Situation in Bayern herausgegriffen. Continue reading >>13 April 2020
Fighting the Virus and the Rule of Law – A Country Report on Norway
Governments across Europe are quick to limit personal freedoms in the name of fighting the pandemic. The case of Norway, however, reveals how the process of adopting these measures can compromise democratic discourse and procedure. The main rule of law challenges we have seen here are an overreach of the authorities of their legal powers, a lack of transparency and exclusion of the public from public decision-making and battle over jurisdiction to regulate between the central government and local authorities. In the end, it is not just our health, but the rule of law that is under threat. Continue reading >>
0
12 April 2020
Coping with Covid-19 in Portugal: From Constitutional Normality to the State of Emergency
As we write this report, it is unclear how the Covid-19 outbreak will unfold in Portugal. The country reacted quickly to adopt measures aimed at reducing social contact, including the closure of schools and a general ban on non-essential movement. Whether that will prove efficient to avoid the collapse of the national health system and prevent thousands of deaths, only time will tell. In this contribution, we describe and reflect on the action taken by public powers to address the Covid-19 pandemic, considering the situation as of April 9. Continue reading >>
0
12 April 2020
Indonesia’s Fight against COVID-19: A Battle Over the Meaning of Emergency?
Indonesia is a perfect example of how poorly a country can handle the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19). In February, when Indonesia’s neighbouring countries such as Singapore were occupied with the restriction of the entry of foreigners into their territory after the announcement of the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, Indonesia’s government under the Presidency of Joko Widodo (Jokowi) introduced the opposite policy which made it easier for foreign tourists (including those from the mainland China) to travel to Indonesia. The purpose of this particular policy according to Jokowi’s government was to exploit the economic gaps which would arise from foreigners’ fears of travelling to Indonesia’s neighbours including Singapore and Thailand. Continue reading >>11 April 2020