24 February 2021
,

COVID-19 in Sweden: A Soft Power Approach

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 >>
0
23 February 2021
,

Breeding More Social Turbulence? – Thailand’s Unprepared Response to the Second Wave of COVID-19

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 >>
0
23 February 2021

Finland: Soft measures, respect for the rule of law, and plenty of good luck

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 >>
22 February 2021
,

COVID-19 in Brazil: A Sick Constitutional Democracy

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 >>
0
22 February 2021
,

The Australian Response to COVID-19: A Year in Review

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 >>
0
22 February 2021

Power and the COVID-19 Pandemic – Introduction & List of Contributions

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 >>
0
02 February 2021

The French Habeas Corpus and Covid-19

In January 2021, the French Constitutional Council published an important decision on the protection of the right to liberty during the state of sanitary emergency. The Constitutional Council decided that extending the duration of pre-trial detention without a decision made by a judge was contrary to article 66 of the Constitution. The decision implies that while authorities can resort to exceptional powers during a pandemic, they must still respect basic human rights. Continue reading >>
27 January 2021

‘Laws of Fear’ in the EU

COVID-19 has demonstrated the fragility of EU free movement rules when faced with an unknown virus of such magnitude and strength, while raising the issues of power, solidarity and trust in the system. The fear of COVID-19 has also had a strong impact on the application of two principles in EU free movement law: the principle of proportionality and the precautionary principle. The pandemic has had a transformative effect on the application of these principles. Continue reading >>
0
25 January 2021

Gesundheitlicher gleich wahlrechtlicher Notstand?

Am vergangenen Dienstag, den 19. Januar im Innen- und Kommunalausschuss des Thüringer Landtags eine Expertenanhörung zu einem Gesetzentwurf statt, der eine pandemiegerechte Durchführung der vorgezogenen Landtagswahl im September 2021 sicherstellen soll. Das zugrundeliegende Anliegen, die besonderen pandemiebedingten Regelungen in parlamentarischer Verantwortung zu treffen, ist zu begrüßen. Doch der Inhalt des Sondergesetzes ist problembehaftet. Continue reading >>
0
14 January 2021

Das Problem mit den Gefälligkeitsattesten

Rechtspolitisch ist die Lage rund um die Maskenpflicht und die Möglichkeit, sich von ihr befreien zu lassen in mehrfacher Hinsicht problematisch. Problematisch einerseits, weil (wohl nicht ganz zu Unrecht) der Eindruck besteht, dass es für Menschen, die nicht aus gesundheitlichen, sondern aus politischen Gründen das Tragen der Maske ablehnen, ohne größere Umstände möglich ist, sich per Attest von der Maskenpflicht befreien zu lassen. Problematisch andererseits, weil dieser Anschein dazu führt, dass diejenigen, die tatsächlich aus gesundheitlichen Gründen nicht dazu in der Lage sind, eine Maske zu tragen, unter den Verdacht der Coronaleugnung gestellt werden. In diese Problemlage greift der Beschluss des 11. Senats des OVG Berlin-Brandenburg vom 04.01.2021 (11 S 132/20). Continue reading >>
Go to Top