scholarly journals ODGOVOR DRŽAVE NA BOLEST COVID-19 - NA PRIMJERIMA HRVATSKE I SRBIJE

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 69-90
Author(s):  
Maja Nastić
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The State ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Given

Given the current pandemic coronavirus, the paper analyzes the state’s response to the dis- ease caused by the virus (COVID-19) from the standpoint of two neighbouring countries i.e. the Republic of Croatia and the Republic of Serbia. Special attention was paid to the states’ response to the pandemic from human rights perspective. The research was conducted into the patterns of their “struggle”, especially as regards the human rights restrictions they had opted for within their constitutional framework. The starting point of the paper was that human rights often are the victims of the crises and that they are easily restricted for a longer periods. In this respect, the author deals with possible answers to the questions about the quality and content of human rights, and how the protection of human rights was ensured in these exceptional circumstances. This legal framework was linked to current statistics on the number of COVID-19 cases. Having analyzed the response of the two states, it could be noted that both states have constitutional provisions governing the state of emergency, allowing them the rule of law in these exceptional circumstances. Both constitutions recognize a list of human rights that may be derogated in state of emergency. However, in Croatia, the state of emergency was not introduced, and the human rights were restricted in accordance with the given epidemiological situation. In Serbia, the struggle against COVID-19 took place in state of emergency and was marked by an extremely restrictive regime of human rights, which was partly in conflict with the constitutional order. The constitutional concept of absolute protection of human rights, in their broadest sense, had proved unsustainable in practice.

scholarly journals RELEVANSI KONSEP NEGARA HUKUM PANCASILA DENGAN WELFARE STATE DALAM IMPLEMENTASINYA DENGAN PELAYANAN PUBLIK DI INDONESIA

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
I Ketut Cahyadi Putra
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Justice ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
The State ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Public Welfare ◽  
Basic Formula ◽  
State Administration ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Republic

The State of Pancasila Law essentially stems from the principle of kinship, deliberation of consensus based on customary law, and protection of human rights with the principle of balance between the rights and obligations and the function of the law of auxiliary. As contained in the Fifth Precept of Pancasila that is social justice for all Indonesian people, and the opening of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia related to the phrase "advancing public welfare" is the basic formula of welfare state ideology then manifested into the constitution of the state of Indonesia to be made Guidance of nation life and state administration. Negara Hukum Pancasila esensinya berpangkal pada asas kekeluargaan, musyawarah mufakat berlandaskan hukum adat, dan perlindungan hak asasi manusia dengan prinsip keseimbangan antara hak dan kewajiban dan fungsi hukum pengayoman. Sebagaimana yang terkandung dalam Sila Kelima Pancasila yaitu keadilan sosial bagi seluruh rakyat Indonesia, dan pembukaan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 terkait frase “memajukan kesejahteraan umum” merupakan rumusan dasar ideologi welfare state kemudian dimanifestasikan ke dalam batang tubuh konstitusi negara Indonesia untuk dijadikan pedoman hidup berbangsa dan penyelenggaraan kenegaraan.

Public Security in the Polish Law on State of Emergency

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-100
Author(s):  
Bernard Wiśniewski
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Public Security ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Security Environment ◽  
States Of Emergency ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Polish Law ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

This article presents the essential issues in the provisions of the law relating to public security in force in the Republic of Poland which are used in conditions of extraordinary internal threats that cannot be dealt with using ordinary legal tools. The considerations are based on an analysis of the legally regulated obligations of the state as a political organisation to society for securing the conditions for its survival in a changing security environment. This serves to present the basic issues of public security and the rules for the use of the State instruments for states of emergency. The rest of this article presents the relationship between issues of public security and a state of emergency. In this part of the article it is essential to discuss the circumstances that must exist to be able to employ specific legal measures in the conditions of threats to the constitutional order of the State and threats affecting the security of the citizens or of public order (including those caused by terrorist activities). Consequently, it discusses the impact of the rigours of a state of emergency in relation to the potential for limiting the escalation of these threats. The final part of the article also presents other instruments, apart from the state of emergency which, in the Polish legal system, can be used in the fight against threats which endanger public security and that are related to prohibited activities in cyberspace.

scholarly journals Derogation of Human Rights and Freedoms in RNM during the State of Emergency Caused by COVID-19

SEEU Review ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-42
Author(s):  
Abdulla Azizi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Survey Methods ◽  
The State ◽  
International Standards ◽  
European Convention ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
Territory Government ◽  
Restrictive Measures

AbstractConsidering that in times of state of emergency or civil emergency (such as the pandemic caused by COVID 19), governments in many countries around the world have restricted human rights and freedoms through legally binding government decrees. These restrictive measures increasingly raise dilemmas about their effect and possible violations by the government of international norms guaranteeing human rights. The paper aims to analyze whether these restrictive measures set out in the decisions of the Government of the Republic of Northern Macedonia (RNM) are in compliance with the derogations allowed under the European Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms (ECHR) and the positive laws in power. In the framework of this paper is analyzed whether these measures have the sole purpose of protecting the health of citizens or not.The work is limited in terms of time (as long as the state of emergency lasted three months) and territory (government decrees with the force of law).Descriptive, historical, analytical, comparative and citizen survey methods are used in this paper.Government decrees have been analyzed in order to assess whether they were prudent, in accordance with international standards and consequences that they have caused to citizens.The conclusions provide data on whether the management of the situation has been appropriate or not and to what extent it has been effective, as well as how much it has been within the international framework and how they have affected the quality of life of citizens.

scholarly journals “The way to Dayton”: the military conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina peaceful settlement process in 1992-1995

2020 ◽  
pp. 72-83
Author(s):  
V.M. Zavhorodnia ◽  
A.S. Naumov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
The State ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Military Conflict ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Dayton Agreement ◽  
Sharp Criticism

The paper examines the preconditions for the conclusion, significance and consequences of the implementation of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, also known as the Dayton Agreement between the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Four plans for peace achievement are considered, in which the International Community had consistently sought to resolve the Bosnian conflict in 1992-1995. The process of concluding a unique international document that not only put an end to the bloody interethnic confrontation and established new foundations for relations between the three Balkan countries, but defined the principles of the constitutional order of the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina is examined. The authors analyze the ambiguous scientific and political assessments of the Dayton Agreement, ranging from unequivocal approval to sharp criticism, and the reasons for the success of the Dayton Process, including joining the U.S. negotiation process and ensuring compliance with NATO’s commitment to violators. The risks inherent in the Dayton Agreement in the constitutional order of Bosnia and Herzegovina are also identified. The problem of the constitutional order of Bosnia and Herzegovina on the basis of the Dayton Agreement is vital for the post-Yugoslav space. Despite the declared principle of equality of citizens, in fact, political human rights in the country directly depend on ethnicity, and public authorities are based on the principle of national representation. The sovereignty and independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina raise a number of issues, given their control by International bodies. An analysis of historical experience convincingly shows that the Dayton Accords can only be seen as a temporary mechanism for resolving the crisis and easing tensions, which has made it possible to achieve peace, end ethnic discord and lay the foundations for a democratic system in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Recognizing the effectiveness of the Dayton Agreement, the authors argue that some of its provisions do not comply with generally accepted principles of International Law, in particular, in terms of the territorial organization of the state and the formation of public authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This approach does not comply with the principle of equality of human rights, regardless of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other beliefs, national or social origin, property status, birth or other circumstances. It is also undeniable that the Dayton Accords did not resolve the interethnic conflicts in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The paper also seeks to identify ways to address the Bosnian crisis in the current situation in Ukraine, given the annexation of Crimea and the protracted military conflict in Donbas, and to determine the admissibility and potential limits of external intervention in military conflicts.

scholarly journals The Legal Framework for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights in Cameroon by Non-Governmental Organisations

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-45
Author(s):  
Alvine Longla Boma
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The State ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Civil Society Organisations ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

Civil Society organisations play key roles in African countries. This is not an exception in the Cameroonian dispensation. Indeed, the existence and operation of civil societies in this jurisdiction is legitimated by a 1990 law allowing the free formation of associations. Even though the state has the primary obligation to promote and protect human rights, there also exists a plethora of associations with the same interest. This paper is motivated by the state’s wanton failure in ensuring the enjoyment and fulfilment of the right. For one thing, the state has maintained a stronghold on the Civil Society through legislation which gives public authorities a leverage over human rights defenders. Moreover, an analysis of existing legal and institutional frameworks available to allow human rights non-governmental organisations thrive, leaves much to be desired. Findings reveal that though there are adequate laws and institutions which ensure the creation and functioning of Civil Society organisations in Cameroon, there are also contradictory laws which give the public authority an edge over these organisations and allow them to sanction the activities of some human rights defenders under the guise of maintaining public order. We argue that there should be adequate protection offered to human rights defenders as well as the relaxation of laws permitting public authorities to illegally sanction the activities of relevant non-governmental organisations.

scholarly journals State responsibility for damage caused by unfair sentence or unfounded arrest

2013 ◽  
pp. 653-665
Author(s):  
Natasa Mrvic-Petrovic ◽  
Zdravko Petrovic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

The legal basis of state responsibility for damage caused by unfair sentence or unfounded arrest is the need to protect fundamental human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and generally accepted international rules. The right to compensation on this basis (although subjective civil right) has a sui generis legal nature, because it is connected with the protection of human rights. Joint public-private legal nature of such a request is expressed in the legislation of the Republic of Serbia, because the circle of authorized persons and the conditions under which they may be entitled to compensation is determined by the criminal procedural rules, while the existence of a legally recognized forms of damage and the extent to which the damage may be reimbursed is estimated according to the general rules of Law of obligations. While the legislation is very progressive, it is observed that, in practice, the applications for compensation are usually submitted because of the most unreasonable detention of up to one month or three months, and the inefficiency of the criminal proceedings, suspended upon the expiration of the absolute limitation of prosecution. The state could easily affect these practices. Also, the priority of state must be meeting its financial obligations with regard to final adjustments, and the imposition of demands for compensation.

scholarly journals Limits in Times of Crisis: on Limitations of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the Slovenian Constitutional Order

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-31
Author(s):  
Samo Bardutzky
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Personal Liberty ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

The purpose of this article is to discuss the issue of limitations of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the 1991 Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia. The discussion is set in the context of a large-scale health crisis, i. e. the SARS-CoV-2 (the virus) and COVID-19 (the disease) epidemic. The article first describes the position of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the Slovenian constitutional order, and discusses the possibilities to limit human rights and fundamental freedoms. In this section, the article introduces the concept of ‘limitations on limitations’ (similar to the German Schranken-Schranken) and presents the requirements of such limitations in Slovenian constitutional law. It then turns to the mechanism of temporary suspension and restriction of human rights and fundamental freedoms during a war or state of emergency as foreseen in Article 16 of the Constitution. In the third part, the article discusses the limitations of human rights and fundamental freedoms enacted brought forward by the government measures intended to tackle the epidemic, i.e. the concrete substatutory norms passed between March and October 2020. This article presents selected issues and affected human rights such as freedom of movement, personal liberty, right to health, and freedom of assembly. The final part of the article discusses the concept of ‘limitations on limitations’ that has demonstrated its relevance for the protection of a meaningful level of human rights in the period of the epidemiological crisis.

scholarly journals Eswatini's legislative response to COVID-19: Whither human rights?

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Musa Njabulo Shongwe
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The State ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Emergency Powers ◽  
Executive Authority ◽  
Constitutional State ◽  
Response Measures ◽  
Long Term Impact

Having been confronted with the COVID-19 pandemic, the Kingdom of Eswatini has had to adopt both soft and hard response measures. The constitutional emergency response framework had not envisaged the type of emergency brought about by COVID-19, forcing the state to enact extraordinary regulatory measures. Unprecedented emergency powers have been conferred on state functionaries. Questions have arisen as to the nature of these emergency powers, the manner in which these powers have been exercised and the absence of special oversight mechanisms. The response measures and regulations have had an unparalleled impact on lives and livelihoods of Emaswati. This article explores the nature of emergency powers in the laws of Eswatini, and the particular effects of the COVID-19 regulations on human rights. This article commences with an analysis of constitutional emergency powers in Eswatini and the limitations thereof, and considers the question of why the state did not invoke a constitutional state of emergency. The article proceeds to examine the nature of statutory emergency powers under the Disaster Management Act, and considers whether there are effective legal limitations on the exercise of executive authority and effective safeguards against the abuse of power. The article then deals with the particular impact of the COVID-19 response legal framework on human rights protection. In this regard, the article advances examples of situations where rights have been infringed. Finally, the article proposes that the state's response measures should continuously endeavour to mitigate the long-term impact on human rights.

The State of Emergency and Exception in Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia: The ‘License to Kill’ the Rule of Law?

2020 ◽  
pp. 002190962096253
Author(s):  
Francesco Tamburini
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Democratic Process ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Social Unrest ◽  
The Rule Of Law

This paper shows how the constitutional provisions related to the state of emergency and exception, although they are contained within democratic traditions, were set to operate in Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia as a mechanism of basic control and maintenance of liberal autocracies. The state of emergency model was used for the survival of regimes in times of instability and social unrest, leading in some cases to the suspension of human rights for many years. Nevertheless, these provisions were modified or lifted when the regime had to show a more convincing stake to the democratic process in 2011.

scholarly journals Parlamentārās kontroles īstenošanas īpatnības un problēmjautājumi Covid-19 pandēmijas laikā

2021 ◽  
pp. 467-473
Author(s):  
Aleksandrs Kuzņecovs ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Liability ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Rapid Spread ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

Due to rapid spread of Covid-19 worldwide, Latvian government declared the state of emergency. This decision was adopted by the parliament in order to contain the virus and undertake all the necessary measures to prevent its further spread. At the same time, it is clear that government’s actions undertaken within the state of emergency mostly remain unchecked. The absence of any legal basis for the parliament to extend their oversight during the state of emergency makes role of the parliament in these circumstances unclear. The current position of the parliament precludes political and legal liability over the executive and their officers. Lack of the delegated legislative and human rights restriction clause applicable specifically during the state of emergency raises questions regarding powers of the government and parliamentary control during the state of emergency. The article explores the possible solutions to rectify such flaws in the legal system of the Republic Latvia

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document