Venice Commission - Observatory on emergency situations

www.venice.coe.int

Disclaimer: this information was gathered by the Secretariat of the Venice Commission on the basis of contributions by the members of the Venice Commission, and complemented with information available from various open sources (academic articles, legal blogs, official information web-sites etc.).

Every effort was made to provide accurate and up-to-date information. For further details please visit our page on COVID-19 and emergency measures taken by the member States: https://www.venice.coe.int/WebForms/pages/?p=02_EmergencyPowersObservatory&lang=EN

8. Which human rights have been limited/derogated from in your country, in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic?

  Albania

The Council of Ministers and the Health Ministry imposed restrictions on the freedom of movement and assembly (prohibition of free movement, imposition of circulation hours, imposition of administrative sanctions), freedom to exercise economic activity and the right to property (closure of various businesses by entities that sell food items, pharmacies, avoidance of procurement procedures, providing for direct contracting), implication to the right of access to courts (due process, reasonable time) (prohibition of conducting trials, except for those of an urgent nature, such as: security measures), implication to the right to education (prohibition of conducting the teaching/educational process in the premises of schools, kindergartens, nurseries, conducting of online teaching which, for a number of reasons, has not been accessible to all).

Examples: Normative act of the Council of Ministers no. 3, dated 15.3.2020 "On taking special administrative measures during the duration of the COVID-19 infection period"; Order of the Minister of Health and Social Protection no. 134, dated 8.3.2020 "For self-isolation of persons entering the territory of Albania from the isolated area in Italy", Order of the Minister of Health and Social Protection no. 135, dated 9.3.2020 "On the closure of educational institutions to prevent the spread of COVID-19".

  Andorra

Schools closed. Borders with France and Spain closed.
Activities in non-essential sectors stopped, by government decree. Public Administration working at minimum level. Health care reduced to urgent and COVID-19 cases.

  Armenia

The following derogations form basic rights were in particular made by the Decree of the Government on the Declaration of the State of Emergency:
- the limitation of the freedom of movement (Paras 1-9.1, 27-54 of the Decree on declaring the state of emergency),
- the right of property (paras. 10-10.4),
- freedom of assembly (16-17.2),
- conduct of economic activities and
- the freedom of the press (the later was later repealed), as well as
- the rights of persons in the penitentiary institutions.

  Austria

Several human rights have been limited since 15 March 2020 by means of the Covid-19-Acts and regulations, which authorize measures aimed at limiting, on the one hand, social contact in order to combat the spread of the virus, and, on the other hand, at reducing adverse effects on business enterprises and employees. In the meantime, some of these laws have already ceased to be in force (as provided for in the respective laws).

Many limitations of human rights result from the prohibition on entering public places (applicable in the entire territory of Austria) in Section 1 of the regulation of the Minister of Health according to Section 2 lit 1 of the COVID-19 Measures Act. This prohibition restricts, among others, freedom of movement (also affected by travel restrictions and quarantine in several municipalities), the right to respect for private and family life, the right to personal liberty, the right to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression. Implemented measures also limit the right to freedom of religion (e.g. closure of churches), the right to education, to property (e.g. by means of fines imposed due to breaches of COVID-19-Acts5), to privacy as well as freedom to conduct a business and to engage in work – since many shops had to close. The closure of shops also affected the principle of equality (e.g., for a certain time, only smaller shops with a maximum of 400 sqm were allowed to open). Visits to hospitals, care centres and similar institutions had been prohibited, schools and kindergartens had been closed, sports grounds and playgrounds had been shut. These measures have affected the right to private life, the rights of the child and the right to education. Furthermore, the right to data protection has been affected, among others, because schools communicate with students and their parents via online platforms or mailing lists. See also Q9.

  Azerbaijan

On March 23, 2020, in order to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus a special quarantine regime was declared by the Government for the period from March 24 to April 20.

The special quarantine regime envisages the following measures. Those above the age of 65 are banned from leaving home. Lonely persons of this age will receive social services in accordance with the law. Entry and exit to/from Baku, Sumgayit and Absheron region is restricted. This restriction doesn’t apply to special-purpose vehicles, including ambulances, emergency and rescue vehicles, as well as cargo transportation vehicles. Passenger transportation between districts and cities is suspended. The relevant departments were instructed to ensure the return of Azerbaijani citizens from abroad by charter flights with the condition of their placement in compulsory quarantine for a period of 14-21 days within a certain schedule. In this case, preference should be given to families with young children, the elderly, persons in need of medical care, and women. The Baku Transport Agency should provide a special line for express buses that will run along the route between metro stations from 06:00 to 22:00. Passengers are advised to minimize the use of the metro and give preference to ground modes of transport. Gathering in groups of more than 10 people in public places, including on the streets, boulevards, parks, etc. is banned. Citizens are advised to keep a distance of two meters. A new regime is introduced in catering enterprises. The operation of all shopping centers is suspended (with the exception of supermarkets, grocery stores and pharmacies located there). The relevant departments were instructed to ensure the operation of grocery stores.

On March 27, 2020 the special quarantine regime, effective as of 29 March 2020 was strengthened. The inter-regional and inter-city movement of transport facilities were fully suspended for the period of the special quarantine regime except for special purpose vehicles including the vehicles for emergency medical aid, lifesaving and survival, rescue, agricultural and social service purposes, as well as cargo carrying trucks. The transport facilities were able to freely move within the boundaries of Baku and Sumgayit cities and Absheron region. Working hours of Baku metro were limited. Baku metro shall work only from 07:00 a.m. to 09:00 a.m. and 17:00 p.m. to 20:00 p.m. During the special quarantine regime, customers were serviced only in supermarkets, grocery stores and pharmacies. Delivery and online sales will remain without any restrictions. During the special quarantine regime, customer service at all catering establishments, including restaurants, cafes, and teahouses was suspended. To regulate the density of people flow, the government limited entrance of individuals to the boulevard, parks, and recreation areas.

By the Decision of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated April 2, 2020 a limited movement regime has been established in the territory of the country from April 5, 2020 to April 20, 2020. Under the Decision the following persons are allowed to move on the basis of service cards or a certificate of employment. All other persons are allowed to leave the place of residence in the following cases:
1. due to urgent medical necessity and to receive treatment on any schedule;
2. in connection with the need to purchase food and other daily necessities, as well as medicines, and to use banking and postal services;
3. in connection with attending the funeral of a close relative.

Individuals mentioned above were allowed to leave the premises once in a day for each reason specified above under sections 1 and 2 for 2 hours, and section 3. In order to obtain a permit to leave the place of the residence, individuals must send an SMS a specially designated number. The content of the SMS should show the number under which an individual need to leave and identification data (SMS message is free of charge). Identification data includes a number of an identity card or simiular ID document for foreigners. Upon getting positive feedback, an individual will be able to leave the place of residence.

In order to leave the place of residence in the event of a situation that poses a direct threat to life and health, sending an SMS is not required. In addition, when people are being summoned to court or law enforcement agencies, they leave their place of the residence without sending an SMS. In this case, they present by the request of the police officers a document proving the summons of the court or law enforcement agencies.

By the Decision of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated April 18, 2020 the special quarantine regime in the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan was extended until May 04, 2020. The Decision of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated April 24, 2020, lifted some restrictions on the special quarantine regime in the country. Under the Decision, the certain restrictions were lifted starting from 27 April 2020 on the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan. In subsequent months, the Cabinet of Ministers pursued with the softening of restrictions in regions and cities of Azerbaijan and the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, by gradual cancellation of some of the restrictions on leaving the house, restoring activities in certain sectors of the economy, lifting restrictions on access to parks and recreation areas, etc. However, certain restricions remained even in summer 2020 (suspension of access to the country by land and air, except for freight; suspension of the educational process in all educational institutions, suspension of inter-city travel of certain type, ban on weddings and some other mass events, closure of some cultural facilities, etc.

By a series of decisions of the Cabinte of Ministers the special quarantine regime in the country has been been extended, but some of the restrictions imposed earlier were either lifted, or lightened.

  Belgium

The ministerial decrees mentioned in the answer to question 3 contain limitations on the following rights and freedoms:
- freedom of movement (prohibition of movement, imposition of driving hours, limitation of so-called "essential" trips; curfew; restrictions on travel to / from Belgium)
- freedom of assembly (ban on gathering several people and sporting and cultural activities, both public and private, and / or limitation of the number of participants)
-the freedom of religion (prohibition of religious services and / or limitation of the number of participants)
-the freedom to exercise an economic activity (closure of various "non-essential" businesses, in particular the horeca and commerce sector)
-the right to property (prohibition to go to his second residence; closure of businesses)
-the right to education ((partial) suspension of school activities with physical presence, temporary closure of schools, universities and kindergartens)
-the right to respect for private and family life (the obligation to wear a face mask in certain circumstances, in particular in public transport and in shops and commercial streets, containment measures, quarantine measures, limitation of visits to family members at home or in nursing homes, hospitals and prisons, limitation of the number of social contacts)
-the right to health care (postponement of certain non-urgent medical operations)

  Bosnia and Herzegovina

On the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a number of measures restricting human rights have been adopted. For example, some measures concerned the use of personal data of persons who are infected, in mandatory isolation or who violated the order on mandatory isolation (in respect of which the Agency for Personal Data Protection of BiH 24 March 2020 issued a decision on prohibiting the competent authorities at all levels of government in Bosnia and Herzegovina from publishing personal data on persons who are positive for coronavirus as well as persons who have been issued isolation and self-isolation measures). These measures are relevant for the right guaranteed by Article 8 of the ECHR. A decree adopted in the Republika Srpska prohibited dissemination of information causing panic and inciting riots during the state of emergency: this decree affected the freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention. It is evident that the measures adopted during the pandemic affected both freedom of assembly and freedom of movement. At present there are no cases where a violation of the freedom of movement has been found.

  Bulgaria

The right of free movement and the right of assembly were temporally limited due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Schools, nurseries and kindergartens were closed. Visits to entertainment and gaming halls, discos, bars, cinemas, restaurants and coffee shops were suspended. Visits to sports and children's playgrounds, city parks and gardens, museums, libraries and galleries were suspended. Temporary restrictions were imposed on the number of people who could gather. Organization of weddings, balls and other organized gatherings of big groups of persons were prohibited.

Since then most of the limitations have already been lifted or modified by imposing lighter measures. Currently pursuant to Minister of Health’s Order No. РД-01-549/30.09.2020, as from 01.10.2020 to 30.11.2020 the following temporary anti-epidemic measures have been introduced as part of the Order:
- attendance classes are conducted in accordance with the prepared Guidelines;
- language centers, educational centers, organized by legal entities and individuals provide their services online, and where it is impossible – a physical distance between the persons of 1.5 meters should be guaranteed;
- congress and conference events, seminars, exhibitions, incl. other public events are to be held online, and where it is impossible, they can be held without exceeding 50% of thee total capacity of premises where they are held, subject to respecting a physical distance of 1.5 m between the attendees.
- cultural and entertainment events (theaters, cinemas, stage events, concerts, classes in dance, creative and musical arts) may continue their activities provided that they do not exceed 50% of their total indoor and outdoor capacity, subject to respecting the physical distance of 1.5 m between the attendees;
- all group and individual sports events wfor all age groups indoors are held without an audience;
- visits to discos, piano bars, nightclubs for indoor and outdoor entertainment are allowed when the seats are occupied not more than one person per square meter;
- group celebrations indoors and outdoors (including weddings, etc.) are organized in compliance with a physical distance of 1.5 m.

  Cyprus

From 24 March, by means of a comprehensive decree, several restrictions were introduced in the provinces of Lefkosia, Lemesos, Larnaka, Ammochostos and Pafos, notably: limitation to the freedom of movement with only defined exceptions (e.g. journeys for work or health, physical exercise or other identified reasons), closure of markets and bazars, prohibition to attend any place of worship and of some traditional Easter celebrations (lighting of bonfires), closure of retail businesses with strictly defined exceptions (e.g. orthopaedic and optic material, food, pharmacies, laboratories dealing with industrial gases, vehicle reparation, dry cleaners, pet shops, etc.).

From 11 March, schools in the province of Nicosia were closed, a measure subsequently extended to schools and educational establishments throughout the country.

On 28 February, the Council of Ministers decided to close the four check-points along the ceasefire line separating the Republic of Cyprus from the Turkish-controlled north of the island. A curfew was introduced on 31 March.

One measure raised some controversy: the Ministry of Health's decree of 15 March introduced a requirement for Cypriot citizens to show a medical certificate stating they were free of coronavirus infection in order to be allowed into the country. That measure, plus an obligation to quarantine for 14 days regardless, was strongly contested as it essentially prevented Cypriot citizens living abroad from returning home, as in some countries the medical tests required to obtain the certificate were not possible. It was contested by many that such measure ran counter to the Constitution, in particular Article 14, which states that 'no citizens shall be banished or excluded from the Republic under any circumstances'.
Two students submitted a request for an interim order of suspension to allow repatriation from abroad. The administrative court dismissed the claim, however, as concerning an act of government and therefore not subject to judicial review.
As of 21 May, the restrictive measures were gradually lifted, subject to guidelines issued by the competent authorities.

  Czech Republic

In the course of the state of emergency, the Czech Republic introduced a far-reaching system of exceptional measures. Most of these measures ceased to operate by 17 May (end of the state of emergency), though some, often in a modified form, have remained in force after this date. The measures have been repeatedly revised and modified. The following human rights have been primarily affected (for more information [click here):
a) Right to free movement
• Restrictions on free movement within the country: on 16 March, free movement was limited with the exception of travel to and from work and trips necessary to ensure basic human needs (e.g. foodstuffs, pharma shopping, helping older family members). On 24 April, free movement of people outside was allowed for groups of up to and including 10 people. Originally, the restrictions were imposed by the Government decision (Decision No. 215). Later on, the legal basis was changed to the decisions of the Ministry of Health. By its decision of 23 April 2020 (14 A 41/2020), the Prague Municipal Court abolished the latter decisions due to the lack of competence of the Ministry of Health to adopt such measures in the state of emergency. Since then, the restrictions were again introduced and/or modified by the Government decisions.
• Restrictions on free movement without a face mask: as of 19 March, the obligation to wear a face mask or other covering of the nose and mouth in all areas outside of the place of residence was introduced (Government Decision No. 247). The decision has been progressively moderated, with various exceptions (members of a single household, children up to 2 years, drivers in private cars etc.) introduced. As of 25 May, the obligation only applied in the interiors of buildings (outside home) and in public transport. Again, the restrictions were at first introduced by Government decisions but later on newly based on decision of the Ministry of Health. Applications challenging the legal basis have been submitted to courts.
• Mandatory individual quarantine: on 13 March, the mandatory 14-day quarantine was introduced for anyone arriving to the Czech Republic from areas under increased risk of COVID-19 (Government Decision No. 209). Later, the obligation was extended to all persons arriving to the Czech Republic. Since the end of the state of emergency, the obligation has been gradually loosened to apply only to persons arriving from areas under increased risk again.
• Mandatory collective quarantine: during the state of emergency, some 20 municipalities were temporarily (14-day) closed in connection with the spread of COVID-19. Certain health and social premises, especially those hosting older persons, were subject to mandatory quarantine as well.
• Restrictions on travelling to/from the Czech Republic: as of 16 March, access to the Czech Republic was prohibited for all foreign nationals with certain exceptions. The citizens of the Czech Republic were prohibited from leaving the country, again with certain exceptions (cross-border workers). International air, rail, coach, boat or road travel for more than 9 persons was suspended. As of 14 April, travelling abroad for essential activities (business trip, a visit to a doctor or a relative, etc.), was allowed. As of 27 April, access to the Czech Republic was open for certain EU citizens and the Czech citizens were allowed to freely leave the country. As of 11 May, rules on the travel to/from the Czech Republic were relaxed again and cross-border public transport was allowed to restart.
b) Right to freedom of assembly: as of 13 March, all sporting, cultural, religious and other activities both public and private involving more than 30 people were forbidden (Government Decision No. 199). Since the end of the state of emergency, the restrictions have been gradually loosened. By 14 June, it is possible to organize events involving up to 500 persons.
c) Right to property
• Suspension of retail sales and sales of services: on 14 March, retail sales and the sales of services in business premises were suspended, with some exceptions (foodstuffs, electronics, ICT, fuel, pharmacies, chemists, animal welfare goods and feeds, opticians, newsagents, laundromats and e-shops). Progressively, new exceptions were added. Some of the legal acts serving as the basis for these restrictions, issued by the Ministry of Health, was abolished by the Prague Municipal Court in its decision of 23 April 2020 (14 A 41/2020) for the lack of competence.
• Freezing of flat rents: On 23 April, a moratorium on the increase of flat rents, for both public and private premises, was declared (Government Decision No. 445), to be terminated on 1 June (Government Decision No. 601).
d) Right to education: on 12 March, full-time education in elementary, secondary and tertiary educational facilities was suspended for the whole period of the state of emergency. Teachings has gradually restarted since the end of this state, though participation in classes (for children) has remained non-mandatory. Final exams and entrance exams have been organized in a modified way.
e) Right to privacy: as of 30 March, the so-called “smart quarantine” project has started up in test mode. The goal of smart quarantine is to prevent the further spread of SARS CoV-2 coronavirus in the Czech Republic as quickly and effectively as possible. It is based on mapping the contacts of positively tested individuals for COVID-19 using modern information technologies. The instrument may not be used without the agreement of the persons concerned.
f) Right to religion: the measures limiting the right to freedom of assembly introduced during the state of emergency applied to religious services as well. These services were thus suspended and had to be held online (which actually happened). By the end of April, the services could resume with the maximum number of 15 participants. With the loosening of the limits imposed on public assemblies, this restriction has been further relaxed since then.

  Denmark

There have been limitations in rights concerning personal freedom and right to assemble, introduced by the executive orders on the basis of the pre-existing legislation, or amendments introduced in March 2020. Gatherings of more than 10 were forbidden, schools, public institutions and universities were closed, tand a number of business (hairdressers, dentists, restaurants, bars) were closed as well. The Government also ordered the closure of Danish borders. Since then some of those limitations have already been lifted.

  France

The main restrictions concerned the freedom of movement as well as the freedom of assembly. Significant restrictions also affected the freedom to undertake an activity (this was mainly aimed at the closure of establishments and businesses and thus access to employment).

  Germany

Measures necessary in order to limit the spread of the virus and to prevent health systems from being overburdened have been taken at the federal, the Länder and the municipal level.

Wide-ranging measures interfering with fundamental rights of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany (GG) were put in place by Länder governments, cities and municipalities and vary in form and duration. The Federal Chancellor and the heads of government of the federal states agreed on guidelines for joint action.

However, planned actions were implemented differently and at different speed by the Länder. The actions amount to an interference with those mentioned below fundamental rights of the Basic Law (GG); it is not un-common for a measure to affect simultaneously several fundamental rights.

For example, those measures y affect the right to free development of personality (Article 2 I GG): since March 16, 2020, travel restrictions have been imposed by ordinances and general orders of the Länder and local units on the base of an order from the federal Interior Minister. Travelers are not allowed to enter and exit without a valid reason. The ban initially only affected risk countries designated by the Robert Koch institute, and later all countries. The prohibitions on contact which limit gatherings in public space of more than two people, the obligation to keep a distance of 1,5 m and to wear masks, particularly in shops and public transport, may arguably be seen as interfering with the right to free development of the personality. The transmissions of health data or the compulsory introduction of “corona-apps” for the identification of high-risk contacts (which is being discussed but not actually implemented) amount to an interference with the right to informational self-determination.

The freedom of the person (Article 2 II 2 GG) was affected: persons with symptoms suspected of or confirmed to be infected with Covid-19 and their contacts as well as return travellers are obliged to stay at home for a limited time while some essential activities (shopping for food) are still allowed.

The right of equality before the law (Article 3 I GG): Closing down schools and kin-dergardens for most, but not all children, affects the right to equality before the law. The same applies to the distinction between essential and non-essential businesses or small and large stores according to sales area when deciding whether to close or to reo-pen business.

The freedom of religion (Article 4 I GG): Since event and assembly bans also apply to religious communities they are associated with an infringement of the freedom of religion.

The protection of marriage and family (Article 6 I GG): general movement re-strictions and the restriction of visits of family members in closed institutional settings such as retirement homes, hospitals including the limitation of the access to the delivery room for expectant fathers mean grave infringements of family life.

The freedom of assembly (Article 8 I GG): Most Länder first banned all gatherings of more than two individuals who do not live in the same household; later assemblies were again permitted with certain limits in compliance with the prescribed social distance requirements.

The freedom of movement (Article 11 I GG): This basic right was infringed, for example, by the prohibition to enter the Land of Mecklenburg-Pommerania for people without a first place of residence in this country. The ban of the transport of people without first place of residence on the North Sea Islands in Lower Saxony or the pro-hibition of travel for touristic purposes to Schleswig-Holstein have the same effect. Problematic from the point of view of freedom of movement is also the prohibition to visit people in institutional settings (hospitals, nursing homes, pensioner’s homes, prisons, refugee camps).

The occupational freedom (Article 12 I GG): Closing non-essential businesses, cultural and educational institutions, social and physical distancing measures at workplaces amount an interference with the occupational freedom.

The right to property (Article 14 I GG): Business closures that result in large financial damage or even in the loss of the business or the restriction of the use of second homes as the result of travel restrictions interfere with the right to property.
But these fundamental rights are not absolute; according to the Basic Law the exercise can be limited for valid reasons including public health emergencies.

  Hungary

Government Decree 41/2020 (11 March) on the measures to be taken during the state of danger related to the COVID 19 epidemy provided for the following measures: temporarily reintroduction of border controls, blocking access to trains, bus and civilian passenger aircrafts coming from the territory of the Italy, China, the Republic of Korea, Israel and Iran; access to Hungary was prohibited for all foreign citizens, with exception of EEA citizens entitled to permanent residence; health screening and (self)quarantine for nationals returning from high-risk countries; closure of higher education institutions. (See in English here).

Government Decree 46/2020 (16 March) provided for: the closure of catering facilities and stores between 3 p.m. and 6 a.m. (except shops selling food, household products and pharmacies); ban on organising and attending public events, performances and assemblies. (See in English here).

Government Decree 47/2020 (18 March) affected the freedom of contract: it introduced payment moratorium for the capital, interest and fee payment obligations of debtors arising from credit, loan or financial lease contracts. See in English here. Government Decree 62/2020 (24 March) on detailed rules concerning payment moratorium of Government Decree 47/2020 (18 March) set out further detailed provisions on the subject. See in English here. The Decree has frozen the rental fees and prohibited termination of lease contracts in certain sectors (tourism, catering, gambling, film industry, performing arts, event organising or sports services). Any employer may unilaterally order employees to work at home or to work remotely and may take necessary and justified measures for checking the health of employees. It provided that, upon agreement between the employee and the employer, they may depart from the provisions of the Hungarian Labour Code.

Government Decree 64/2020 (25 March) on measures related to the export of certain medicaments imposed an export ban hydroxychloroquine sulphate. (See in English here)

Government Decree 71/2020 (27 March) (see in English here) on restricting movement imposed a curfew with the following details:
• obligation to limit social contact with other persons, with the exception of those living in the same household, as much as possible, and to maintain a distance of at least 1.5 meters from others;
• leaving a domicile, place of residence or private home shall be permitted only for a justified reason set out in the Decree (e. g. work activities, access to health care services, shopping in a grocery store selling daily consumer goods etc.)
• designated shopping hours for the elderly (age 65 and over), closure of catring facilities etc.

Government Decree 81/2020 (1 April) prohibityed foreign citizens, with certain exceptions, to enter the territory of Hungary. Hungarian citizens, upon arrival to the territory of Hungary via passenger transport, shall be exposed to an obligatory health check, and depending on the outcome of the examination shall be quarantined at a designated facility or at home. See in English
Government Decree 95/2020 (9 April) extending the restriction on movement ordered the curfew imposed by the Government Decree 71/2020 (27 March) on restricting movement is extended until withdrawal (the Government reviewed the decision on a weekly basis); the local municipalities may lay down arrangements for the opening hours of markets operating in their territory, and arrangements for access to the market by persons who are over the age 65; the local municipalities may specify stricter rules for the time of the Easter holidays. See in English here.

Government Decree 118/2020 (16 April), Government Decree 148/2020 (23 April), and Government Decree 167/2020 (30 April) delegated to the local municipalities the power to specify stricter rules for the restriction of movement.

Government Decree 168/2020 (30 April) (see in English here) on protective measures set out that
• with the exceptions of Budapest and Pest County the restriction of movement shall be lifted;
• social distancing rules shall prevail, except those living in the same household, by keeping interpersonal distance of at least 1.5 metres;
• when shopping in a store or staying on a means of public transportation, everybody shall be obliged to wear mouth and nose covers (such as medical masks, scarfs or shawls);
• persons over 65 years are only allowed to visit grocery stores, drugstores, pharmacies between 9-12am (this time slot is reserved for this age group only; however, municipalities may define different rules for markets);
• while students are permitted to return to the higher education institutions in accordance with the respective decision of the rector, they cannot use student dormitories.

Government Decree 170/2020 (30 April) on measures regarding sports events and trainings set out that sports events may be held without spectators, behind closed doors.

Government Decree 179/2020 (4 May) on derogations from certain rules regarding data protection and freedom of information during the state of emergency stipulated that
• in case of data processing with the purpose of preventing and detecting the spread of COVID-19, data subjects may not practice their data subject rights until after the end of the state of danger, any such requests and (court) proceedings shall be stalled until after the end of the state of danger;
• requests for disclosure of data of public interest shall be responded to within 45 days in case responding to the request within the initial deadline of 15 days would prejudice the performance of public duty.

Government Decree 181/2020 (4 May) on the electronic monitoring of mandatory home quarantines provided for the following measures (see in English here):
• the epidemiological authority orders monitoring of the compliance with the mandatory home quarantine via electronic software suitable for tracking the movements of, and for transferring the facial image of, and the health data provided by, the adult concerned having the capacity to act, provided that the adult concerned states that the requirements for installing the software are met and they have the appropriate device, and they volunteer to install and use the software;
• the police may compare the movement data provided by the software with the data of the designated location or mandatory home quarantine;
• the police shall notify the epidemiological authority in case of any violation by the person concerned of the obligation to install and use the software;
• for the identification of the person subject to mandatory home quarantine, the epidemiological authority and the police shall be entitled to process the facial image of the person concerned.

Government Decree 207/2020 (15 May), Government Decree 211/2020 (16 May), and
Government Decree 240/2020 (27 May) gradually lifted some of the restrictions in different areas of Hungary.

As mentioned above, the Act LVII of 2020 terminating the state of danger called on the Government to terminate the state of danger declared on 11 March. The Government terminated the state of danger with the Government Decree 282/2020 (17 June) which entered into force 18 June 2020. Upon the termination of the state of danger, the decrees of the Government adopted in the state of danger ceased to have effect (see Article 54 Paragraph (3) of the FL).

As also mentioned above, the Government, declaring a state of health crisis, has introduced a state of epidemiological preparedness in the entire territory of Hungary with Government Decree 283/2020 (17 June) on introducing a state of epidemiological preparedness.

On 18 June 2020 new protective measures have been introduced by Government Decree 285/2020 (17 June) "On the protection measures of the epidemiological preparedness". Wearing masks is mandatory (except for children under 6) on public transport, in stores during purchase and for vendors in the closed rooms of catering shop. Indoor or outdoor events may be held with no more than 500 people present at the same time.

Entering of foreign citizens to Hungary in passenger traffic is subject to restrictions laid down in Government Decree 341/2020 (VII. 12.). According to the Decree, countries are classified by the decision of the Chief Medical Officer as “red”, “yellow” and “green”, based on the severity of the situation in each, and different restrictions apply to entrants. Separate rules have been introduced for Hungarian citizens (including their family members) and non-Hungarians. Hungarians can freely enter from a country classified “green”. Entry from “yellow” or “red” countries will entail undergoing a health check at the border and 14 days in quarantine unless two consecutive negative coronavirus tests taken 48 hours apart within the previous five days can be proven. Hungarian citizens coming from a “yellow” country depart quarantine after a single test, while those from “red” countries will need two negative tests to do so. The same rule applies to non-Hungarian citizens from “yellow” countries, but those from “red” ones will be forbidden entry altogether. The Chief Medical Officer is continuously monitoring the status of the epidemic in various countries, classified per different colours, and shall review their classification if necessary. (The Hungarian text of the last two documents can be found [here|http://njt.hu/cgi_bin/njt_doc.cgi?docid=220126.384770" target="_blank">here and [here|http://njt.hu/cgi_bin/njt_doc.cgi?docid=220710.386185" target="_blank">here).

  Ireland

The effect of the measures taken since April 2020 under the Health Act 1947 as amended include limitations to the freedom of assembly, the freedom of association, the freedom of movement, the right of bodily integrity, and the right to private property.

  Italy

The most important limitations have regarded freedom of movement (Article 16), of religion (Article 19), of assembly (Article 17), and of economic initiative (Article 41). The question is also open on whether the people who have been subject to the “quarantine” have had their personal freedom limited (art. 13).

  Korea, Republic

IDCPA describes the powers of the State bodies in coping with an epidemy, but it also guarantees the right to be treated, the right to be compensated for damages caused by isolation and medical treatment (Article 6 (2), the right to know about infectious diseases, the obligation of the State ro bear expenses related to medical treatment of the infectious diseases under this act (Article 6 (3)) and the obligation of the citizen to cooperate with the State (Article 6 (4)), including the treatment and isolation measures.

IDCPA imposes an obligation of citizens to cooperate in epidemiological investigations (including the obligation to submit truthful information to the epdiemiological authorities), and those who seriously violate them are subject to criminal punishment (Article 18 (Epidemiological Investigations) and Article 79 (Penalty Provisions)m with penalties going up to two years in prison or a fine of 20 million won. No criminal punishment is to be imposed for minor offenses. However, in exceptional cases when the offender deliberately hides his/her movements and the damage has become very serious, authorities may charge that person. Authorities are allowed to collect CCTV information, credit card usage history, mobile phone-based location information, and immigration records to prevent the spread of infectious diseases and early detection of patients - as defined by the Presidential Decree, in accordance with the IDCPA.

The powers of the authorities are provided in Article 76-2 of the IDCPA.
Article 76-2 regulates Request to Provide Information, which helps to trace their epidemological status, movements, etc. Current legislation contains safeguards aimed at protecting personal information: for example, Personal Information Protection Act, Protection of Communications Secrets Act and Act on the Protection and Use, Etc. of Location Information, etc. Authorities that receive personal information must comply with confidentiality, and personal information must be discarded if the purpose of use is achieved. In addition, personal information holders should be informed of the use of such information.

  Kyrgyzstan

The following restrictions have been imposed in the territories where the President of the Kyrgyz Republic decreed a state of emergency in connection with the Covid-19 epidemic:
- a curfew has been imposed to restrict the movement of citizens at nighttime;
- a special regime for the entry and exit of citizens in places where a state of emergency has been declared;
- individuals may not leave their home (apartment) or the place where they are being observed or treated (hospitals) for a fixed period;
- conducting of spectacles, sports and other mass events, as well as strikes, meetings, rallies, street marches, demonstrations and etc. have been prohibited;
- transport restrictions and other restrictions to prevent the spread of coronavirus infection.

  Liechtenstein

No fundamental rights were abolished entirely, but the measures taken to combat and limit the spread of COVID-19 led to several significant restrictions of different fundamental rights, in public interest. The measures affected in particular the following fundamental rights: the freedom of establishment (Article 28 of the LV), the freedom of movement (Article 2, 4th Additional Protocol to the ECHR), the freedom of trade and commerce (Article 36 of the LV), the freedom of religion (Article 37 of the LV, Article 9 of the ECHR), the protection of private and family life (Article 8 of the ECHR), or the freedom of association and assembly (Article 41 of the LV).

  Lithuania

The specific limitations were set out in the decisions of the Government introducing the quarantine regime, which was amended several times, following the development of the situation.

Under decree No 207, with further amendments, the Government limited the freedom of movement of people within the national territory, prohibited foreigners' entry to the country, introduced border traffic controls, imposed mandatory isolation of 14 days for persons entering Lithuania, introduced restrictions in public transportation, prohibition for cruise ships to enter the port of Klaipėda. Special zones were subjected to stricter regulations - thus, as from 16 April to 24 April, entering or leaving the town of Nemenčinė as a coronavirus hotspot was totally prohibited, except for work travel. Certain economic activities were suspended, for example sport, leisure, cultural and training institutions; mass sportive and entertainment events were banned, restaurants, cafes, bars, nightclubs and other entertainment venues were closed (except where food can be taken away or it can be delivered otherwise); hotel services could be prohibited by the decision of the municipality (some municipalities took such a decision). The governement ordered temporary ban on all types of assembly, introduced distance learning in schools and universities, closed pre-school institutions.

Some restrictions concerned the right to privacy/family life: prison and hospital visist suspended, surgical operations and planned hospitalisation postponed (subject to exceptions); restrictions on recieving some medical services at home.

The Government also recommended to limit all religious meetings, including holy masses; this recommendation was implemented by religious institutions.

Most of the restrictions were revoked by the end of May 2020.

  Mexico

Fundamental rights were not derogated from. However, decress of the Ministry of Health ordered certain measures, namely temporary closure of schools and universities, ban on public gatherings of a certain size, interruption of all "non-essential" business activities until 30 April 2020 etc.

  Monaco

Limitations were inotriduced in respect of the following freedoms: freedom of enterprise, freedom of assembly, freedom to come and go. Restrictions related to the conditions of practice have also affected freedom of religion and freedom of education.

  Morocco

As soon as the first cases of contamination were declared on 2 March 2020, various measures were taken, including compulsory containment, a ban on gatherings and the closure of businesses.

On the instructions of the Minister of the Interior on 4 March, i.e. the day after the first case of contamination, which appeared on 2 March, the administrative authorities, at the level of all the prefectures and provinces of the kingdom, were instructed to take a host of measures restricting freedoms consisting of a ban for the entire month of March 2020 on events involving the participation of persons coming from abroad, including conferences, forums, cultural or sporting events, raids or rallies, as well as any event involving the participation of more than a thousand persons residing on the national territory.

In the same direction, on 16 March, the minister in charge of the administration reform department issues instructions on the measures to be taken in the various public services. In this press release, it is specified that the state of health emergency does not mean the cessation of economic activity, but the taking of exceptional measures imposing the limitation of the movement of citizens. It is added that leaving one's home will be conditional on obtaining an official document from the authorities, according to the following conditions: - Going to work for administrations and open establishments, including companies, factories, agricultural work, premises and business areas related to the citizen's daily life, pharmacies, the banking and financial sectors, hydrocarbon supply stations, clinics and doctors' surgeries, branches of telecommunications companies, essential liberal professions and premises for the sale of hygiene products. In this regard, travel will be authorised only for those persons whose presence at the workplace is necessary and will be conditional on the issue of a certificate duly signed and stamped by their superiors at work. - Travel for the supply of products necessary for daily life within the perimeter of the place of residence, or to receive the necessary care or to obtain medicines from pharmacies; continues the same source, warning that every citizen is obliged to comply with these compulsory measures under penalty of the penalties provided for in the penal code. Within this framework, the local authorities and the Public Forces, National Security, Royal Gendarmerie and Auxiliary Forces, will ensure that the control measures are applied firmly and responsibly against any person on the public highway.

Within the framework of the state of health emergency, the public authorities concerned shall take the necessary measures to: a) ensure that persons do not leave their homes, and shall take the necessary preventive measures, in accordance with the guidelines of the health authorities; b) prohibit the movement of any person from his or her home, except in the following cases of extreme necessity: - movement from home to the place of work, including vital public services, private enterprises, the professions in essential sectors and institutions established by order of the government authorities concerned, subject to regulations laid down by the administrative authorities concerned for this purpose; - movement for the purchase of essential products and goods, including the purchase of medicines from pharmacies ; - travel to doctors' surgeries, clinics, hospitals, medical analysis laboratories, radiology centres and other health facilities, for diagnosis, hospitalisation and care; - travel for compelling family reasons to assist people in difficult situations or in need of assistance. (c) The prohibition of any gathering, assembly or meeting of a group of persons for any reason whatsoever. Exceptions to this prohibition are meetings held for professional purposes, subject to the preventive measures laid down by the health authorities; d) The closure of shops and other establishments open to the public during the period of the declared state of health emergency. Such shops and establishments may be opened by their owners for their personal needs only.

For further details see the decree of 24 March 2020.

  Norway

The Norwegian constitution does not provide for a formal derogation, but there have been restrictions to human rights as a result of containment measures taken by the government:
a. Freedom of movement: Mandatory quarantine and isolation for persons infected, possibly infected or returning from abroad or areas with high infection rates, subject to criminal penalties.
b. Protection of property: Restrictions on services and industries, for example bars.

  Peru

Article 3 and following of Supreme Decree Nº 044-2020-PCM specified the measures limiting human rights during the state of emergency. In particular, pursuant to Article 4 during state of emergency nation-wide quarantine was imposed, allowing circulation only for the provision and access to the following essential services and goods (acquisition, production and supply of food, pharmaceutical and essential products, hospital visits, return to the place of habitual residence, care for older adults and children etc. Article 7 provided for the suspension of access to the public to premises and establishments, with the exception of retail food business establishments, pharmaceutical, medical products, hygiene products, fuel etc. Article 8 provided for temporary closure of borders. For the text in Spanish click here.

As of April 7, 2020, 52,000 people had been arrested for not complying with the daytime restrictions on movement.

  Portugal

Pursuant to the Presidential Decree declaring a state of emergency in the context of the pandemic COVID 19, as well as renewal declarations, some rights have been restricted.

The Decrees of declaration and renewal of the state of emergency set out, in a direct and very detailed way, the rights that could be subject to limitations, as well as the possible scope of those limitations.

The first renewal declaration decree was the most detailed, in face of circumstances that existed at that time.

Under the terms of the Decree of the President of the Republic, the Government could determine, whenever necessary and appropriate in accordance with the principle of proportionality, restrictions on the right to circulate and to remain anywhere in the national territory; to property and private economic initiative rights; workers' rights; the right of international movement; the right to assemble and demonstrate; freedom of worship in its external dimension; freedom to learn and teach.

In exercising its powers to determine and implement the necessary measures to face the spread of the epidemic and control its effects, the Government, regarding the limitations, used criteria of minimum intervention and opted, to the extent possible, for the creation of some duties, with appeal citizens to respect them, but without direct sanction.

In Enforcement Decrees (nº 2-A/2020 of March 20; 2-B/2020, of April 2 and 2-C/2020, of April 17), restrictions on the right to circulate were established at various levels of intensity: mandatory confinement of the infected person at home in another appropriate location; special duty of self-protection of certain categories of people at greater risk of suffering severe health consequences in case of contamination (citizens over 70; immuno-depressed, diabetic, patients with chronic, cardiovascular or respiratory diseases) with the obligation to remain at home and only with the possibility of displacing in cases expressly provided for; and a general duty of confinement at home for other people, albeit with an extensive list of exceptions justified by objective reasons.

Property and private economic initiative rights have been limited by the mandatory opening and functioning of establishments or companies essential to community life and the provision of health services, as well as by the imposition of temporary closure or limitation to the functioning of certain activities that, due to their nature, were likely to create high contagion risks in the context of the pandemic situation (listed in Annex II of Decrees); safety rules were established for the operation of the activities allowed during the exception. Within the scope of the restrictions on the right to use the property and relative rights, it was determined that certain contents of the non-housing lease agreement were suppressed (the closure of facilities and establishments cannot be invoked as a basis for resolution, denunciation or other contractual forms of real estate use); and the civil requisition of establishments or services necessary to combat the disease COVID-19.
Workers' rights were conditioned by the obligation to accept changes in working conditions due to public interest requirements (working hours, jus variandi, workplace); the right to strike was limited with regard to essential and unavoidable services.

With regard to international movement, border controls on persons and goods, including health checks, could be determined, in articulation with the European authorities and in compliance with the Union Treaties, as well as all measures necessary to ensure the international movement of essential goods and services.
Concerning freedom of worship, celebrations of a religious nature and other worship events involving a gathering of people were prohibited; in the case of funerals, the obligation to respect a maximum attendance limits to be determined by the competent local authorities, with respect for safety distances between people were foreseen.

In order to prevent the risk of contagion, school activities with physical presence were suspended and replaced, in technically possible conditions, either through teaching activities by remote means or transmitted through public television.

The specific measures were taken by the Governmental Decrees, implementing the President's declaration of the state of emergency (as approvide by Parliament). An example of such decree can be found here and here.

  Serbia

The measures implemented through the Govwernmental decrees affected freedom of movement(Article 39 of the Constitution provides for limiting this right for the goal of "prevention of spreading contagious diseases or defense of the Republic of Serbia"), freedom of assembly (Article 54 of the Constitution, which allows to restrict this right "if necessary to protect public health").

  Slovakia

There was a restriction on the freedom of movement when the curfew was ordered during the Easter holidays in 2020. The main objective was to enforce social distancing, since it is a tradition in Slovakia that family members visit each other during those holidays. This restriction was based on the state of emergency (Art. 5 par. 3 letter g)).

There was a restriction on the right to privacy and protection of personal data (identification and location phone data), which is describe in detail in Q14. This was not directly based on the state of emergency but on regular legislation passed at the time, although it was limited in time to the state of emergency or extraordinary situation.

The Public Health Authority has been issuing and updating various measures restricting various fundamental rights. These measures interfered mainly with the freedom of movement (obligatory quarantine in a state-owned facility for people returning from abroad, obligatory home quarantine for people returning from abroad with the duty to use mobile phone app for tracking movement), freedom of enterprise (closing or limiting opening hours of various businesses, imposing safety and hygiene measures, prohibition of mass events), freedom of religion (prohibition of masses and religious ceremonies).

  Spain

The state of alarm does not allow the suspension or derogation of fundamental rights. The declaration of the state of alarm allows for the introduction of limitations or restrictions to the exercise of a fundamental right, but does not deprive this right of its fundamental character or of its constitutional rank. Nor does it suspend, even provisionally, the effectiveness of the right. The right remains in force and is endowed with all the applicable constitutional guarantees (effective judicial protection, respect for the core content of the right ex Article 53.1 of the SC, examination of the proportionality in the exercise of the limitations imposed and protection by a constitutional complaint before the Constitutional Court).

Among other measures, Article 7 of Royal Decree no. 463/2020 on the declaration of the state of alarm established serious limitations or restrictions on the way how the freedom of movement is exercised (Art. 19 SC). It was done in order to contribute to the achievement of a public interest such as guaranteeing people's health, in line with what is authorized by Articles 11 and 12 of Organic Law 4/1981. The decree no. 463/2020 contained a prohibition of going out into the street with the some exceptions set out in Article 7 (acquisition of food, pharmaceutical products and staples; providing assistance to health centres, services and facilities; commuting; returning to the habitual residence; assistance and care of children, minors, disabled or especially vulnerable persons; going to financial and insurance institutions; or due to force majeure or situation of need, or any other activity of similar nature).

The "containment measures" on road travel and movement of individuals that have been adopted in various fields have had an impact on the exercise of certain rights but without suspending them while maintaining all the guarantees for judicial defence; such has been the case in the field of education, business, cultural and recreational activities, hotels and restaurants, places of worship and religious ceremonies, public health, customs transit and transport, food supply, power supply and other essential services, public and private media and the establishment of a specific system of penalties. Such penalties are currently under judicial review for they had been adopted under general grounds of “disobedience”.

However, some Constitutional Law scholars have argued before the Ombudsman that the limitation of rights has been so important than they consider we are in front of a real suspension of rights. For them, in reality the state of alarm corresponds to a state of exception. Main opposition parties (PP and Vox) agree with such statement.

  Sweden

The freedom of assembly and the freedom to demonstrate have been restricted by a governmental ordinance (issued under a pre-existing delegation under the Public Order Act, which in turn has been issued in accordance with the constitutional provisions on human rights in Chapter 2 Art. 1, 20 and 24 Instrument of Government). This limited public gatherings to 500 people, later amended to 50 people. This restriction also applies to religious gatherings, though, in accordance with the scope of the right of freedom of religion (Instrument of Government, Chapter 2, section 1, p. 6) this is not seen as a restriction on freedom of religion. However, it could be seen as such a restriction under Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which applies as law in Sweden. See also Q3.

  Switzerland

The ordinances of the Federal Council have massively and simultaneously infringed a large part of the fundamental rights provided for in the fundamental right’s catalogue of the Constitution (Article 7-34 of the Constitution). The freedoms restricted during the crisis are, in particular,
- the freedom of movement (Article 10 al. 2 of the Constitution), even though no exit ban was imposed,
- the freedom of assembly (Article 22 of the Constitution),
- the freedom of religion and conscience (Article 15 of the Constitution),
- the economic freedom (Article 27 of the Constitution).
For one month, the activities of the courts were reduced to a minimum functioning (see Q12), thereby limiting the general procedural guarantees (in particular Article 29 of the Constitution). Some social rights, such as the right to basic education (Article 19 of the Constitution), have been limited as well. However, teaching at compulsory schools was not interrupted, although students were not taught in the classrooms. Not least, political rights have also been restricted to some extent (see answer to Q17). The use of a so-called “Tracing-App” may have an effect on the right to privacy. Although this technology is still in a testing phase, the right to privacy and data protection (Article 13 of the Constitution) will become an issue.

  North Macedonia

Position of the Constitutional Court on permissible limiations

The Constitutional Court of N. Macedonia addressed the question of limitations on human rights in the times of emergency in two decisions. In Decision No. 49/2020 the Court quoted only the first three paragraphs of Article 54 and did not mention paragraph 4 thereof. The Court concluded that the Constitution allowed to limit human rights only in a limited number of cases determined by the Constitution. The Court pointed to three articles of the Constitution, which determine a limitation of certain human rights, as are the Article 21 (right to peaceful assembly), Article 27 (right to movement) and Article 38 (right to strike). From this the Court derived the conclusion that rights other than these three cannot be limited even in the emergency situation.

By this decisions the Cosntitutional Court nullifyied the Decree with the force of law on the limitation of the payment of public sector employees’ benefits and compensations for the period of emergency situation, on the basis that the limitation of the labor rights does not have a constitutional basis.

One of the judges of the Constitutional Court wrote a dissenting opinion stating that, in his opinion, any freedom and right determined in the Constitution, except the so-called absolute rights, be subject to limitation, as transpires from paragraph 4 of Article 54.

This dissenting opinion is consonant with the majority opinion in Resolution 42/2020 in which the Constitutional Court stated that “in emergency situation, the right to life, the interdiction of torture, inhuman and humiliating conduct and punishment, the legal determination of punishable offences and sentences, as well as to the freedom of personal conviction, conscience, thought and religious confession, cannot be restricted”.

Limitations on specific rights

The right to movement was restricted, both internally and cross-border. The police curfew was introduced and a stay-home requirement was ordered by the Decision for prohibition and special regime for movement on the territory of the Republic of North Macedonia. This decision was amended 16 times, introducing different types of curfews. A different regime was adopted for some of the weekends.

The longest curfew was during the Easter Holidays when the country was under the 85 hour long lock-down. There were different curfews for minors under the age of 18 and for persons above the age of 67, which were designed to avoid that these groups do not go outside simultaneously. This distinction was challenged before the Constitutional Court, which issued a temporary measure suspending its implementation as potentially discriminatory on the basis of age.

One of the towns (Debar) with many infections was fully quarantined, so the residents were not allowed to leave the city. Borders were closed and the entry of the foreigners was restricted. The special permission from the Crisis Headquarters for the entry of foreigners was needed. Citizens and foreigners who entered the country were sent to the State-organized quarantine establishments or (if there was a justification on health, family or other grounds) - allowed to remain at home under condition of self-isolation. From 23 May 2020 the obligatory state-quarantine after entrance in the country was abolished if the person has PCR test made not earlier than 72 hours before entrance in the country.

Those who had contact with virus-positive were obliged to be tested. At several occasions people refused to be tested, so the testing was done with police assistance.

The restrictions of movement, the stay-at-home requirement also affected the respect of private and family life, especially to the children, which are under shared custody of parents who do not live together.

The right to education was affected: during the crisis all schools, universities and kindergartens were closed. Education was going through forms of online communications, distance learning and home study. Certain children from socioeconomically disadvantaged families faced challenges in accessing and participating distance learning. The state made efforts to tackle inequalities in education by providing internet connections and tablets to children from disadvantaged families.

Mass gatherings were forbidden. Also, the rules of physical distancing were introduced, as well as rules that limited the number of people that can group on public spaces, which affected many aspects of the people’s lives, including organization of group sport activities, celebrations, weddings etc.

The crisis had effect on the right to health care (some non-urgent medical operations postponed), labor rights (unemployement), right to property and enterpreneural activity (closer of malls, restaurnants etc), the right to strike. Access to justice was restricted: the Government adopted the Decree with the force of law that ordered interruption of judicial terms and gave competence to the Judicial Council to decide which types of cases will be considered as urgent and will be held during the emergency. The Judicial Council on 17.03.2020, adopted the Decision which listed several types of cases as urgent (custody, criminal cases related to the breach of sanitary rules, etc.). The pandemic affected also detainees and prisoners’ rights because there was a restriction on visits and external activities of prisoners.

  Tunisia

First, the Tunisian Constitution (Article 70 paragraph 2) states that the Assembly may, with the vote of three-fifth of its members, empower by law the Head of Government, for a period of no more than two months and, with a view to a specific objective, to make decrees-laws, in the area of law. At the end of this period, these decree-laws are subject to the approval of the Assembly.

Indeed, Law 2020-19 of 12 April 2020 empowered the head of government to make law decrees with the aim of dealing with the spread of COVID 19. It allowed the government to issue a series of decree-laws to deal with COVID 19, which the Government did by issuing Decree-Law No. 2020-2 of 14 April 2020, suspending certain provisions of the labour code exceptionally and provisionally, Decree 2020-3 of 14 April 202, setting out exceptional and provisional social measures, Decree 2020-7 of 17 April 2020 relating to the setting of derogatory provisions concerning public officials and the operation of public institutions, state-owned enterprises and administrative services, Decree 2020-8 of 17 April 2020 relating to the suspension of proceedings and deadlines, Decree 2020-9 of 17 April 2020 relating to the sanctions for violations of curfew, traffic restriction, total containment and measures taken against persons affected or suspected of having COVID 19, Decree-Law 2020-12 of 27 April 2020, completing the Code of Criminal Procedure (Remote Trials).

A decree-law was adopted in the Council of Ministers, which introduces the use of the electronic bracelet by the criminal judge as a preventive measure replacing, in some cases, pre-trial detention, and as an alternative punishment to custodial sanctions.

  Turkey

The Turkish authorities took certain measures to ensure social isolation, to maintain social distance and to control the rate of spread of the pandemic in accordance with the recommendations developed by the Scientific Board and of the Ministry of Health. These measures were taken on the basis of ordinary legislation on health hazards.

Some of the measures taken in the context of the said legislation are as follows:
- Measures taken for all entrances / exits to a certain number of cities determined to be at risk,
- Measures targeting people at risk, such as elderly, children, pregnant women and those with chronic illnesses,
- Measures related to public recreational venues such as restaurants, cafes, picnic areas, swimming pools, sports centres, shopping malls, district bazaars etc,
- Measures related to performing prayers collectively in mosques,
- Measures for continuing education and training activities using remote/online education methods at levels of basic, secondary and higher education.

More specifically, for example, the Ministry of Interior authorised local authorities to impose a curfew for elderly people (over 65) and people with a chronic illness. A circular of the Ministry of Health suspended all the resignations of the health workers.

  Ukraine

A number of human rights were limited during the epidemy, on the basis of the special powers given by the executive by the legislation on civil protection and on infectious diseases. The decision of the Cabinet of Minsiters of March 2020 (amended on several occasions by further decisions) introduced limitations on the freedom of assembly and religion (big social gatherings banned), suspended activities of shops, restaurants, and similar businesses, imposed limitations on public transportation services etc. (see here

  United Kingdom

Speaking of a formal "derogation", the Secretary of State has not exercised the power under s. 14 HRA set out in the answer to Q7. There is no other process for derogation from the rights safeguarded by the HRA under domestic law. However, the regulations adopted ynder the the PH(CoD)A and the coronavirus act (see Q3) have limited certain rights and freedoms.

This section deals in brief summary with the restrictions imposed by regulation across the UK. It deals briefly with the restrictions imposed in Scotland and Northern Ireland, even though the powers used in those jurisdictions for the imposition of “lockdown” were created by the CA, and so do not derive from ordinary law which existed prior to the pandemic. The focus is on England as an example jurisdiction, and there is no attempt to exhaustively list the applicable regulations. There have been over 200 statutory instruments in England alone responding to various aspects of the crisis, enabled by over 100 pieces of parent legislation.

A review of the legislation across the jurisdictions suggests that broad use has been made of the powers set out above, and that the emergency procedure sees a lot of use. This has meant that, although Parliament has had a role in scrutinising the government and debating the pandemic in the abstract, there has been limited opportunity for Parliament to scrutinise the text of the regulations.

(i) England
In England, the first wide-ranging public restrictions were imposed by the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020/350 on 26 March 2020, requiring certain businesses to close (reg. 5), imposing restrictions on leaving the home without reasonable excuse (reg. 6) and prohibiting gatherings of more than two people in public (reg. 7). The Regulations create enforcement powers (reg. 8) and offences (reg. 9). A further regulation, The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2020/447, was passed to correct errors in the first one. Further amendments were made by the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2020/500. On 1 June 2020 came the first major change to the restrictions, with the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2020/558, permitting groups of up to six to meet outdoors and groups of two to meet indoors (although not to stay overnight at a place other than home). On 12 June the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (Amendment) (No. 4) Regulations 2020/588 permitted the opening of retail businesses, religious institutions for private prayer, and certain outdoor attractions.

On 3 July 2020 the restrictions were significantly relaxed by the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) Regulations 2020/684. Further relaxation of measures was brought about on 11 July 2020 by the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2020/719; and on 23 July 2020 by the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2020/788. Local authorities were empowered to give directions relating to premises, events and outdoor spaces by the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (No. 3) Regulations 2020/750. On 14 August 2020 the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) (Amendment) (No. 3) Regulations 2020/863 were made, enabling certain venues to open.

On 26 August 2020 gatherings of more than 30 people outdoors were restricted by the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Restrictions on Holding of Gatherings and Amendment) (England) Regulations 2020/907, and gatherings of groups of more than 6 were restricted by the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) (Amendment) (No. 4) Regulations 2020. The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (Obligations of Hospitality Undertakings) (England) Regulations 2020/1008 subsequently imposed obligations on hospitality undertakings to ensure that guests were socially distanced. The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (No. 2) (England) (Amendment) (No. 5) Regulations 2020/1029 restricted opening hours for certain businesses on 24 September 2020, and additional requirements to self-isolate in certain circumstances were imposed by the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (Self-Isolation) (England) Regulations 2020/1045.

The government has also re-imposed restrictions on a local basis where there has been a spike in cases, and in one case imposed restrictions for employees of a particular company (The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (Greencore) Regulations 2020/921). All of these regulations were made using the emergency procedure and the powers under s. 45C PH(CoD)A.

(ii) Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland
The story in the rest of the UK has not been dissimilar, although there have been variations in the speed with which the initial restrictions imposed in March 2020 have been lifted:
In Scotland, restrictions were initially imposed by the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Restrictions) (Scotland) Regulations 2020/103 under the powers created by Schedule 19 of the CA. These regulations were subsequently amended thirteen times as restrictions waxed and waned, each time by use of the emergency procedure. They were finally replaced by the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Restrictions and Requirements) (Scotland) Regulations 2020/279 on 14 September 2020. These restrictions were imposed using the emergency procedure.

In Wales, the first restrictions were imposed by the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Wales) Regulations 2020/308. These were repealed by the CA and replaced by the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales)Regulations 2020/353 and the Health Protection (Coronavirus: Closure of Leisure Businesses, Footpaths and Access Land) (Wales) Regulations 2020/334. The Regulations were repeatedly amended by the emergency procedure to deal with changes in the coronavirus situation.

In Northern Ireland, the first restrictions were imposed by the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2020/55, imposed by the emergency procedure. These were also repeatedly amended by use of the emergency procedure to keep pace with the changing coronavirus situation, under the powers inserted into the PHA(NI) by the CA.

  United States of America

The United States does not use the concept of “derogation” from constitutional rights, and there is no recognized process by which for either the legislature or the executive to derogate from protected rights. That being said, limitations of rights are routinely accepted within the ordinary jurisprudence of both the federal and state Supreme Courts.

As states began to gradually soften their strict stay-at-home orders, they nevertheless maintained restrictions on the size of gatherings, such as only allowing a certain percentage of building capacity to attend gatherings. In South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, the United States Supreme Court denied a California church’s application for injunctive relief from Governor Gavin Newsom’s policy of restricting church attendance to 25% of a building’s capacity or a maximum of 100 attendees. The justices in the majority determined that Gov. Newsom’s policy did not violate freedom of religion (as enshrined in the Free Exercise Clause). The dissenting justices characterized it differently, seeing the order as “discriminat[ing] against places of worship and in favor of comparable secular businesses” (Kavanaugh, J., dissenting).

In Washington, two constitutional challenges have argued that Gov. Inslee has exceeded his state-of-emergency powers by allowing the state of emergency to persist beyond the point at which the emergency had, in the petitioners’ view, been contained. As such, they have claimed, their rights are now being improperly limited.

In Wisconsin, Andrea Palm, the current Secretary-designee of the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, by the power delegated to her by Governor Evers, issued Emergency Order 12 on March 24, 2020, requiring “all individuals present within the State of Wisconsin . . . to stay at home or at their place of residence.” Then, on April 16, 2020, Palm issued Emergency Order 28, extending the stay-at-home order. The Wisconsin Legislature sued Palm to have the Wisconsin Supreme Court declare the extension unconstitutional. On May 13, 2020, in Wisconsin Legislature v. Palm, 942 N.W.2d 900 (Wis. 2020), the Wisconsin Supreme Court did indeed overturn the extension of the stay-at-home order. Thus, the State of Wisconsin no longer has a stay-at-home order in place, for the Court placed the Wisconsin citizens’ liberty interests above the state’s interests in security and limiting the spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus.