Albania was hit the by Covid-19 pandemic, although it seems not as gravely as some of its neighbours. Starting from 10 March 2020 the Albanian Government adopted several measures aiming to limit the spread of the pandemic in the country. Most of those measures have been continuously reviewed, following the development of the pandemic.
Due to the COVID-19 epidemic the Estonian Government (Vabariigi Valitsus), without consulting the parliament (Riigikogu), declared by Order Nr. 76 on 12 March 2020 a state of emergency (eriolukord), defining the epidemic as an “emergency situation”. This is the first time in our modern history where a state of emergency has been declared. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs subsequently informed the Council of Europe of the Estonian derogation under Article 15 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Curating analysis of these developments since early April through the COVID-DEM project, and reading across the 62 published contributions to this outstanding symposium, there are clear commonalities across all democracies affected. Beyond these commonalities, the effect of the COVID-19 response on the democratic system has been – and will be – starkly uneven across democracies worldwide, due to the different democratic ‘starting point’ of each state as the pandemic hit.
Misusing its extraordinary law-making powers which were conferred to it by the controversial Enabling Act during the epidemic state of danger, the Hungarian government expropriated the city of Göd. Apparently the government did so in order to punish the opposition lead municipality - and it seems to prepare further expropriations.
Die politische und juristische Kernfrage der COVID-19-Pandemie ist spätestens mit den Öffnungsmaßnahmen, den über sie geführten Diskussionen und zahlreichen Gerichtsverfahren wieder offen: Wie steht es mit der Abwägung? Ist auch das Leben, dessen Schutz die umfangreichsten und in der Breite massivsten Grundrechtseinschränkungen in der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik hauptsächlich dienen, in eine solche einzustellen und kann es in ihr verfassungsrechtlich zulässiger Weise überwunden werden? Muss es das ab einem gewissen Punkt sogar?
The COVID-19 outbreak constitutes an unprecedented challenge in the history of independent Lithuania, which in its 1992 Constitution embedded a broad list of human rights and freedoms. It seems that so far the emergency powers have been used proportionately and in a time-limited manner, albeit some concerns regarding human rights and the rule of law remain. While it is understandable that the pandemic required a quick response, more attention from the Lithuanian decision-makers on fundamental rights and the required balancing would have been welcome.
Kenya's President is yet to declare a state of emergency and has opted to implement measures that ensure citizens can continue with their lives. Constitutionally, rights may only be limited by law and only to the extent that is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom.
As the Chinese saying goes, killing the chickens to scare the monkeys, China’s courts were quick to set examples of people who committed offences in relation to the country’s response to Covid-19 in order to deter potential offenders. However, the punishments of ordinary offenders and responsible officials highlight China’s constitutional setting – the dominance of the Communist Party in state affairs, and the political role of courts in times of national emergency. This is consistent with China’s self-proclamation – the centrality of the Communist Party’s leadership and the division of functions among state organs without separation of powers. Under such a setting, ordinary people and officials are subject to different rules and have different fates.
In many legal cultures, federalism is the real “F word”. It stands for inequality, privileges, inefficiency. For many, there seems to be an inherent contradiction between the obvious requirement of a coordinated line of command in case of emergency and a pluralistic territorial structure. A closer look at the comparative practice shows a different picture. Has federalism really been an obstacle to effective decision-making? Or rather the opposite?
People have been perplexed by the slow and soft approach of the Japanese government in their attempt to bring COVID-19 under control. The first case of COVID-19 in Japan was confirmed on 16 January 2020. On 30 January, the Japanese government set up the COVID-19 Countermeasures Headquarters. It published emergency countermeasures against COVID-19 on 13 February and presented Basic Policies for Coronavirus Disease Control on 25 February. However, none of these measures have introduced drastic measures such as border controls and/or curfews.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters