06 April 2020
Canada the Good?
Canada is in almost full emergency mode in its bid to flatten the pandemic curve. But so far the federal government has not declared a federal state of emergency in terms of the Emergencies Act (1985), although it has discussed publicly the pros and cons of taking this step and has been urged to do so on the basis that such a declaration would enable a nationwide testing program. There are four main reasons for this hesitation to declare a national state of emergency. Continue reading >>
0 
06 April 2020
Hungary’s Orbánistan: A Complete Arsenal of Emergency Powers
On 23 March 1933, an act was adopted in Nazi Germany in response to the “crisis” of the Reichstag fire to enable Hitler to issue decrees independently of the Reichstag and the presidency. Article 48 of the constitution of the Weimar Republic made this act possible. Eighty-seven years later, on 23 March 2020, the so-called 'Enabling Act' was put before the Hungarian Parliament. This was drafted under emergency constitutional provisions in Articles 48-54. Continue reading >>06 April 2020
Introduction & List of Country Reports
As states of emergency are declared throughout the world in response to the spread of COVID-19, concerns arise as to the use - and potential abuse - of power in a time of crisis. In this Symposium, comparative country reports examine the use of emergency powers from the perspective of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Continue reading >>27 March 2020
The WHO After Corona: Discretionary Powers for the Next Pandemic?
Imagine the World Health Organization (WHO) had declared the outbreak of the mysterious lung ailment in the Chinese city of Wuhan a potential public health emergency of international concern already in late December 2019. It might have been just in time to halt the spread of the disease which by now has become a supreme global emergency of unforeseen proportions. Continue reading >>25 March 2020
(Rule of) Law in the Time of Covid-19: Warnings from Slovenia
It is beyond question that radical limitations of a wide range of human rights are necessary to limit the spread of Covid-19, keep healthcare systems afloat, and help saving human lives. The aim of this contribution is not to argue against such measures per se. In spite of the gravity of the situation, however, any measures adopted to combat it must be adopted by competent bodies, following the procedure and under the conditions envisaged by law. In other words, rule of law concerns have to be fully respected. It is my concern that Slovenia has been failing this »rule of law in times of emergency« test. Continue reading >>21 March 2020
Taiwan’s Fight against COVID-19: Constitutionalism, Laws, and the Global Pandemic
Taiwan has demonstrated to the world its strength and success in combating the spread of COVID-19 despite decades of exclusion from the World Health Organization (WHO) and ongoing bullying from the People’s Republic of China (China). Given its geographical proximity and close economic exchanges with China, Taiwan was estimated to be heavily hit by the spread of COVID-19 originated from Wuhan, China. Reversing the trend, Taiwan has maintained a considerably low number of confirmed cases, and detected most cases of possible community spread, while Europe, the United States and the rest of the world are struggling with an ongoing global pandemic. Continue reading >>21 March 2020
Fighting COVID 19 – Legal Powers and Risks: The United Kingdom
The United Kingdom’s response to the coronavirus epidemic is still in its early stages, but seems likely to – eventually – involve a wide range of the emergency powers currently available to the state, as well as some which do not yet exist. Nonetheless, it already seems inevitable that the success of the state’s response to Coronavirus will eventually be judged not only by the nature of the interferences with individual liberty carried out, but also – and perhaps primarily – by the sufficiency of the associated economic measures. Continue reading >>
0