Venice Commission - Observatory on emergency situations

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

13. Was legislation on the state of emergency or on the emergency amended or adopted to deal with the Covid-19 pandemic?

Albania

Law no.45/2019 “On civil protection”, was not amended, whereas law no.15/2016 "On the prevention and combat against infections and infectious diseases" was amended through the normative act with the force of law no. 2, dated 11.3.2020.

On 16.04.2020 the Parliament approved the amendments to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Albania, which provide for two new criminal offenses, more specifically: "failure of implementation of measures of the state authorities during the state of emergency or during the state of epidemics", as well as “the spread of infectious diseases”. Regarding the first, it provides that the non-implementation or performance of actions contrary to the legal or sub-legal acts issued by the state bodies, in function of the state of the epidemic or the implementation of extraordinary measures, by the person against whom an administrative measure has been given before, constitutes a criminal offense and is punishable by a fine or imprisonment of up to six months. The same act, when committed during the exercise of commercial activity, endangering the health of people, is punishable by a fine or imprisonment of up to two years. Failure to comply with the order given by the competent authorities for quarantine or isolation, or violation of the rules of quarantine or isolation by the person carrying or not the infectious disease, to whom this obligation has been notified by the relevant state authorities, is punishable by imprisonment from two to three years. Regarding the criminal offense "spread of infectious diseases", it is provided that the intentional spread of infectious disease with a high risk to health, through the performance of actions or omissions by the person diagnosed as a carrier of the disease or by the person who intends to spread it, is punishable by two to five years in prison. When this offense is committed through negligence, it is punishable by a fine or up to two years in prison. This same act, when it has caused serious consequences for the health or life of people, is punishable by three to eight years in prison.

Armenia

Yes, certain amendments to the Law on Legal Regime of State of Emergency have been adopted, in particular:
- Article 9.1 provided for restrictions on the right to personal data, private and family life, privacy of communication. The operators of the public electronic communication network shall be obliged in accordance with the procedure established by the decision of the Government of the Republic of Armenia, to provide to the state bodies and legal entities established by that decision 1) customer location data; 2) the telephone numbers directly or indirectly connected with the customer's telephone number, the date of starting the telephone conversation, the necessary data to find out the beginning, and in case of forwarding or transferring the telephone call, data on the telephone number to which the call was transferred (for the text in Armenian see here)

The functions of the special responsible governmental official in the situation of the state of emergency were laid upon the only the Prime Minister or the Deputy Prime Minister who are now allowed to resolve other urgent issues conditioned by the state of emergency (previously the government should nominate relevant person). For the exercise of the powers during the state of emergency Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister may adopt sub-legislative acts. Previously by the decision of the Government of the Republic of Armenia on declaring a state of emergency a collegial body might be established, which was reformed into a consultative body attached to the Prime Minister
or Deputy Prime Minister, respectively (Armenian version of the amendment available via the following link https://www.arlis.am/DocumentView.aspx?docid=142124)

Austria

Neither constitutional provisions nor ordinary laws explicitly regulate emergency situations, albeit the constitution provides for a possibility of the executive to legislate when Parliament cannot meet (see Q1). Hence, no corresponding legislation was amended. There is specific legislation dealing with the pandemic, which gives the exective certain specific powers; this legislation was amended during the COVID-19 crisis (eg. the Epidemics Act).

Azerbaijan

Legislation on the state of emergency to deal with the Covid-19 pandemic was neither amended nor adopted.

However, Milli Majlis introduced administrative or criminal liability for violation of anti-epidemic, sanitary-hygienic and quarantine regimes. According to the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan “On Amendments to the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Republic of Azerbaijan”, dated 17 March 2020, new provisions were added to the Code of Administrative Offenses for violation of anti-epidemic, sanitary-hygienic and quarantine regimes. Thus, according to Article 211 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, for violation of the anti-epidemic regime, sanitary-hygienic and quarantine regimes individuals will be fined in the amount from one hundred up to two hundred manats, officials in the amount from one thousand five hundred up to two thousand manats, or depending on the circumstances of the case, taking into account the identity of the violator, administrative detention for up to one month may be applied, and legal entities will be fined in the amount from two thousand up to five thousand manats.

According to the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan “On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan” dated 17 March 2020, where the violation of anti-epidemic, sanitary-hygienic or quarantine regimes causes the spread of diseases or poses a real threat to the spread of diseases, such violation is punished by the penalty at the rate from two thousand five hundred up to five thousand manats or restriction of freedom for up to three years or imprisonment for up to three years.

Where the same actions cause death or other serious consequences due to negligence, such violation is punished by imprisonment for three years minimum and five years maximum.

In May Cabinet of Ministers adopted a decision that requires residents wear respiratory protection means and keep a social distancing in certain venues across the country. Under the decision, in order to curb the spread of COVID-19 in Azerbaijan, individual respiratory protection means (medical masks, tissue masks, respirator, etc.) should be used in the following cases with keeping the social distance (1.5-2 meters):
- in inter-city and intra-city passenger transport means (bus, taxi, subway, railway, etc.);
- in markets, in closed catering facilities, commercial facilities and service facilities (except for cases when, depending on the type of services provided in the facilities, it is necessary to remove personal protective means);
- in territories intended for reception and servicing of citizens in buildings of state bodies;
- in the territory of buildings owned by individuals and legal entities, where services are rendered to clients;
- in offices in the open space and in production facilities;
- in enclosed spaces that are considered to be monuments of history and culture, places of worship, scientific and medical institutions, social, cultural and other such enclosed spaces;
- in queues in front of terminals at public transport stops, ticket offices, ATMs and payment terminals, commercial and service facilities;
- in public places in the open air, where people meet and are in close contact, where social distance between them cannot be maintained.

The use of masks for respiratory protection is compulsory.

In June the Parliament (Milli Majlis) adopted the amendments to the Code of Administrative Offences, envisaging penalties for failure to use masks in the required places. According to the amendment, for violation of these requirements, individuals will be fined for 50AZN, officials – 100AZN, legal entities – 200AZN. For repeated committing by the person who received the administrative penalty, individuals will be fined 100AZN, officials 200AZN, legal entities 400AZN.

Belgium

Not applicable (but the Belgian federal Parliament has adopted two laws of so-called “special powers” empowering the King (i.e. in fact the federal government) to take all necessary measures to combat the spread of the coronavirus COVID-19 without following the usual legislative procedure).

Bosnia and Herzegovina

There have been no amendments to existing legislation or enactment of new regulations addressing the issue of emergencies or natural disasters. Measures have been taken by the executive authorities of the BiH and its entities.

Bulgaria

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic the National Assembly of the Republic of Bulgaria adopted an ordinary Act on the Measures and Actions during the State of Emergency Declared by a Resolution of the National Assembly of 13 March 2020 and on Addressing the Consequences (SG No. 44/2020, effective 14.05.2020) Promulgated, SG No. 28/24.03.2020, effective 13.03.2020. For the text in Bulgarian click here.

This Act modified a number of provisions of ordinary legislation, giving extra powers to the executive or modifying procedures.

Тhe Health Act of 2004 was amended during the pandemic.

Cyprus

No, the Government used powers provided by the pre-existing legislation

Czech Republic

No, legislation on the state of emergency has not been amended in connection with the COVID-19 crisis. Amending the Law on the Protection of Public Health was considered (see supra 9) but has not carried out so far. Several ordinary laws have been amended in response to the COVID-19 crisis, for instance the Public Procurement Act (Law No. 134/2016 Coll.), which should now allow for a simplify procedure to procure personal protective equipment. Several special usually ad hoc pieces of legislation have been adopted since March 2020, for instance the Law No. 262/2920 Coll. On the compensation bonus related to the emergency anti-COVID-19 measures. Finally, pursuant to the Government Regulation (No. 75/2020 Coll), adopted on 13 March 2020, coronavirus disease has been included in the list of contagious human diseases, the spread of which can be classified as a criminal offence (spreading a contagious human disease by intention or negligence, §§ 152-153 of the Criminal Code).

Denmark

The Law on measures against contagious or other transferable diseases (see in Danish here) was amended twice in March 2020 following the outbreak of Covid-19 (the amendments in Danish are here). The amendments had a sunset clause (March 2021).

The competency to decide measures related to the containment of epidemis (quarantine, closure of public institutions, etc), before the March 2020 amendments, belonged to regional Epidemic Commissions. After the 2020 amendments some of the powers of the regional Epidemic Commissions were transferred to the Minister of Health and the Elderly. The Minister obtaned some additional powers and obligations for the citizens.

France

Yes. A new law creating a state of health emergency was adopted, specifically organising the powers of the authorities, and by which the legislature also empowered the executive to act by ordinance on certain matters, namely Act 2020-290 of 23 March 2020. Under the 2020-290 Act of 23 March 2020, the state of emergency is declared by decree in the Council of Ministers.

Georgia

On 14 July the Parliament passed amendments to the Law on Public Health, allowing the Government to restrict rights in relation to COVID-19 until the end of 2020 without declaring a state of emergency.

Germany

Numerous legal acts were passed at the federal, the Länder and the local level to tackle the epidemic. Interventions relevant to fundamental rights provide in particular legal acts of the Länder and concretizing provisions of the municipalities. In contrast, federal legal acts primar-ily aim to mitigate or compensate for the consequences of the pandemic.

Laws at the federal level mostly comprise a whole bundle of legal acts and concern various areas of law. The corona-related new legal acts or revised provisions provide extensive financial support for the health care system, the research network, for the Länder and the municipalities as well as individuals and companies affected by the corona-related restrictions. They provide temporary suspension of contractual and other obligations of individuals and companies that run into financial difficulties. They allow digital means to replace the personal presence, introduce other expedients to enable the work of authorities, extend the term of office of electoral bodies and much more.

The wide-ranging measures affecting human rights are primarily introduced by ordinances of the Länder or their governments on the bases of §§ 32, 28 I IfSG. The regulations of the largest Land of North-Rhine-Westphalia by population are mentioned here by way of example. They are largely issued by the Ministry for Labor, Health and Social Affairs. These ordinances are reviewed at short intervals and adapted to changing circumstances. Parliamentary acts, on the other hand, regulate the competences of the authorities as well as financial aid from the Land and other measures to mitigate the consequences of the epidemic that require amendments to the laws of the Land.

In the first weeks, due to the lack of uniform rules, cities and municipalities took temporary measures to curb the spread of the coronavirus by means of general orders – schools were closed, pupils and teachers quarantined, open-air events prohibited, restaurants, hotels, shops closed. With the adoption of uniform rules for the Land or the entire territory of Germany, these measures were for the most part superfluous and repealed before their validity expired.

Hungary

In addition to Act XII of 2020 giving the Government new powers to combat and contain the coronavirus (see in English here), Act LVIII of 2020 on the transitional measures related to the termination of the state of danger and on epidemiological preparedness amended the rules of health crisis providing the Government with a wide range of crisis management powers. The amendment sets out that – if the statutory preconditions exist – the state of health crisis ("epidemiological preparedness") shall be declared by governmental decree on the proposal of the minister responsible for healthcare based on the recommendation of the chief medical officer. According to the amendment by means of a decree the Government could restrict or prohibit:
• the operation of any institutions, establishments, events and activities which may contribute to the spread of the epidemic,
• the operation and opening of shops,
• the passenger traffic between certain areas of the country and between Hungary and another country,
• the transport of animals or goods,
• the personal contact of citizens of certain areas of the country, as well as residents of Hungary and other countries
• visiting certain institutions (medical, educational, social child welfare etc.)
• leaving certain areas,
• the sale, consumption or purchase of certain foods
• the consumption of drinking water,
• keeping certain animals.

Additionally, the Government may introduce regulations on the supply of medicines, medical aids and health services; adopt rules on wearing protective equipment; define the time period reserved for the elderly in shops and markets; introduce traffic restriction or traffic ban; order epidemiological isolation; regulate the delivery of consignments. The Government may exercise its power insofar as those are necessary and proportional to the purpose of preventing, tackling and eliminating the health crisis, and preventing and combating its detrimental effects, and may not impose curfew during the state of epidemiological preparedness.

Further amendments lay down that if the measures outlined by the crisis management law are insufficient, the Government may, in order to guarantee that life, health, person, property and rights of the citizens are protected, and to guarantee the stability of the national economy, by means of a decree, suspend the application of certain Acts, derogate from the provisions of Acts and take other extraordinary measures during a state of danger declared in the event of human epidemic. The Government may exercise its power for the purpose of preventing, controlling and tackling the human epidemic, and preventing and combating its detrimental effects, to the extent necessary and proportionate to the objective pursued.

Ireland

See Q3 above for the special legislation introduced to deal with the health emergency. However no laws were adopted to deal with a declaration of a state of emergency as such.

Italy

Not an ordinary legislation (except for the decree laws by the Government, as approved by Parliament - see Q1)

Korea, Republic

The authorities acted on the basis of the existing legilsation on health emergencies; the President did not use its constitutional powers to issue decrees having the force of law and Parliament did not legislate specifically for this purpose

Kyrgyzstan

The Constitutional Law «On the State of Emergency» which was adopted in 1998 is in force in the Kyrgyz Republic. It was amended several times, most recently on 14 July 2015. This Constitutional Act applies to crisis situations, including epidemics, which cannot be resolved without emergency measures.

Liechtenstein

At the legislative level, Act of 8 April 2020 on Accompanying Administrative and Judicial Measures in Connection with the Coronavirus (COVID-19) (COVID-19 VJBG) (LGBl 2020/Nr. 136). This Act will be in force until 15 June 2020.

In addition, the executive adopted various regulations to combat the spread of the virus.

Lithuania

There were some amendments to the existing lelgislation regulating the regime of the quarantine (which was used by the Government to cope with the COVID crisis). Two main legal acts: the Law on the Prevention and Control of Communicable Diseases in Humans and the Law on Civil Protection – have formed the legal basis for the government actions introducing the quarantine regime and the quarantine measures. Both these laws were amended in view of the Covid-19 pandemic. Some other laws were also amended and a new law regulating the consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic for legal persons was adopted. Amendments to relevant laws were adopted few days after the measures were taken by the Government, which can be explained by the fact of postponing some sittings of the Seimas.

On 31 March 2020, the Law on the Prevention and Control of Contagious Diseases in Humans was amended and supplemented, inter alia, by determining the conditions and procedure for situations when it is admissible to temporarily limit freedom of movement and enumerating the cases where some restrictions on economic activity may be introduced. The Government was empowered to impose certain quarantine measures related to restriction or limitation on the determined human rights and freedoms.

Thus, amendments were made related to the mandatory hospitalisation and/or isolation of patients, persons suspected to be ill, those who have been exposed to or are carriers of virus (Article 9 of the Law). The general rule is that the mandatory hospitalisation and/or isolation of persons could be applied by the motivated decision of the commission composed of three doctors until the patient ceases to pose a threat to other persons, but not beyond 7 calendar days without the judicial decision. The new amendment provides that this rule does not apply to cases where the mandatory hospitalisation and/or isolation of persons is necessary in the event of a particularly serious communicable disease, which was the reason for introducing the quarantine regime in the entire territory of Lithuania. In such a case, when the Government takes the reasoned decision that there is no other means to prevent or contain an outbreak of an epidemic, the person could be hospitalised or isolated by a motivated decision of a doctor for no longer than 1 month without the judicial decision (Paragraph 21 of Article 9). The Government used this provision as a legal basis when it introduced the mandatory isolation of 14 days for individuals arriving from abroad.

In addition, provisions regulating the quarantine regime were amended (Article 21 of the above-mentioned law), by providing for particular restrictions on freedom of movement and restrictions on economic activity. In both cases, the Government was assigned the power to take the decision on introducing the quarantine measures (Paragraph 11 of Article 21). In relation to the restrictions on economic activity, the Government may determine the conditions and procedures for the production of goods and their sale, drinking water supply and the provision of services (Point 1 of Paragraph 11 of Article 21). In relation to restrictions on freedom of movement, during the quarantine period, the Government may determine the following measures: to limit or temporarily prohibit all events and other meetings involving more than 2 persons in institutions and public spaces; to limit or temporarily prohibit residents from leaving their municipality, or restrict their movement within it etc. (Point 2 of Paragraph 11 of Article 21). The amendements set out the maximum duration of quarantine (3 months, renewable) (Paragraph 3 of Article 21).
The law (Articles 32, 321, 33) provides for an increase in salaries and social security for employees of healthcare institutions providing healthcare services to patients suffering from particularly serious communicable diseases or implementing the prevention measures in the zones of epidemic outbreaks.

On 28 April 2020, the Law on Civil Protection was amended, inter alia, by specifying the powers of the Government in cases where a state-level situation of emergency is declared. The powers of the Emergency Commission were clarified (Paragraph 8 of Article 2). Article 8, which provides for a list of human rights which may be limited, was supplemented with possible restrictions on freedom of economic activity and the provision of public and administrative services in cases where a state-level situation of emergency is declared.
Also, powers of the crisis management bodies were specified more clearly (Article 9), and special procedures for the functionning of the Emergency Commission were introduced (Point 2 of Paragraph 4 of Article 11).

The Law on Civil Protection was supplemented by a new Article 301, which provides that the Emergency Commission can determine the list of products and services that are necessary for residents, public institutions, municipalities or other economic operators and can monitor the availability of these products and services. The Emergency Commission can recommend to the Government to take measures aimed at increasing the availability of these products and services if necessary.

The Code of Administrative Offences was amended and the fines for infringements of the quarantine rules and other relevant laws during the quarantine period were reinforced. Respectively, the provisions of the Criminal Code related to the violation of the regulations governing the control of epidemics or contagious diseases were also amended.

Parliament adopted the amendments to the Labour Code (Articles 47 and 49) allowing a more flexible regulation of labour relationships in the event of an extreme situation on the state level: an employer may impose vacations on an employee or a group of employees when the Government declares an extreme situation or quarantine on the state level and hereupon the employer is unable to provide the employee with the work agreed upon in the employment contract. In such cases an employee cannot be required to come to the workplace and must be paid remuneration not lower than the minimal monthly salary approved by the Government etc.

Although a state of emergency was not declared, the Law on the State of Emergency was also amended. The list of emergency measures was supplemented: the Government was given the power to limit, during the state of emergency, the maximum wholesale and retail prices for products and services that are necessary for residents and institutions, or introduce restrictions on the sale of these products.

Mexico

Not applicable - there is no special legislation on the state of emergency, so it was not amended

Monaco

No, the existing legislation on the police powers of the Minister of the State was generally sufficient to order measures aimed at dealing with the crisis. Law 1.486 of 9 April 2020 relating to the justice system suspended for two months most procedural and hearing deadlines, with the possibility of extension.

Morocco

A series of texts have been published, headed by the decree-law of 23 March 2020 enacting special provisions for a state of health emergency and the measures of its implementation, the decree of 24 March 2020 declaring a state of public health emergency throughout the country to deal with the spread of the Covid-19 coronavirus, followed by those of 18 April 2020, 19 May 2020, 9 June 2020 and 9 July 2020, which extended it to 20 May 2020, 10 June 2020, 10 July 2020 and 10 August 2020 respectively.

Norway

parliament also adopted the so-called Corona Act, delegating more general legislative powers to the government (expanding powers provided by the relevant legislation on health hazards), which allows derogation and amendments to 62 laws listed in the Corona Act, by way of delegated legislation. The Corona Act specifically requires all delegated legislation to be in accordance with human rights guaranteed by Norwegian law. The Corona Act was finally repealed on May 27. All legislation adopted by the government pursuant to the Corona Act has to be adopted as law by parliament within one month after the date of expiry of the Corona Act, or they will be abolished.

Peru

There has been no new legislation amended during the state of emergency

Portugal

Constitutional and legal framework concerning states of emergency, as defined in the Constitution and in the Organic Law, has not been subject to any modification during face the pandemic.

The legislation implementing the state of emergency, as determined by specific reasons resulting from the pandemic, applies only to the emergency situation imposed by COVID 19 in terms defined by emergency laws.

Serbia

As such, the legislation on the state of emergency or on the emergency was not amended, but the National Assembly introduced changes to the Law on the protection of population from infectious diseases.

At the same time with the termination of the state of emergency, the National Assembly adopted the Law on the Validity of Decrees Adopted by the Government with the Co-Signature of the President of the Republic during the State of Emergency and Confirmed by the National Assembly (“the Official Gazette of the RS” No- 65/2020 – “Law”).

Several Decrees, Orders and Decisions were adopted by the Government with the Co-Signature of the President of the Republic during the State of Emergency and then confirmed by the National Assembly.

Slovakia

Constitutional Law no. 227/2002, which regulates the state of emergency, was not amended during the pandemic. However, most measures taken during the pandemic were not directly based on the state of emergency, the state of emergency largely applied to health care professionals. The only notable exception is the curfew imposed during the Easter holidays.

There were several amendments to the Law on Public Health Care. The most important amendment was carried out by Law no. 119/2020 of 15 May 2020, which introduced for people who had been imposed a home quarantine the obligation to use a mobile phone app for tracking their movement and thus verifying whether they adhere to the quarantine. Law no. 351/2011 was also amended several times.

Law no. 62/2020 of 25 March 2020 introduced the obligation for mobile phone service providers to collect and process identification and location data of effectively their every client and allowed the Public Health Authority subsequent access to those data. This was contested before the Constitutional Court and subsequently suspended (see tQ14). Law no. 119/2020 amended the suspended provisions introduced by the suspended Law no. 62/2020 and implemented some of the objections made by the Constitutional Court in that case. The amendment was passed and took effect before the Court’s decision on suspension was published and thus the Court stayed its proceedings. This new law was not contested before the Court - see Q14.

For the text in Slovak see here.

Spain

Neither the emergency legislation nor the emergency health legislation has been amended. Decisions have been taken to deal with COVID-19 in application of the provisions of the decrees adopted within the legal regime of the state of alarm, within the framework of previously existing emergency legislation or by using the power of the Government to adopt emergency legislation provided for in Article 86 of the Constitution (Decree Laws).

The provisions governing the state of alarm allow the competent authority (in this case, the Government ) to adopt necessary measures to face the extraordinary situation (Art. 11 and 12 LOEAES). In this regard, numerous regulations have been agreed upon, in the form of a royal decree approved by the Council of Ministers or a ministerial order, in which such measures have been specified (they can be consulted on the website created by the Official State Gazette: "COVID-19: European, State and Autonomous Communities Law", for the text in Spanish click here.

Additionally, the Government, when deemed necessary, has also made use of the general authorisation contained in Article 86.1 of the SC, which allows it to make legally binding rules in cases of "extraordinary and urgent need", which are of a provisional nature until they are validated or repealed by the Congress of Deputies (30 days). Since 10 March (before the declaration of the state of alarm, which was agreed on 14 March) and until 14/6/2020, 16 rules of this type have been approved, affecting various areas: protection of public health, economic and social impact, employment, population mobility, assistance to victims of gender violence, taxation, administration of justice, culture, etc.

The purpose of these decree-laws has been to build what is commonly referred to as a social shield against the pandemic which has been driven by the protection of health, as well as the maintenance of the economic fabric within the framework of a social market economy, the preservation of employment and social protection. All these economic measures will continue their ordinary parliamentary procedure before the Spanish Parliament so that they can finally be incorporated into the legal system, when appropriate, and in the terms determined by the Spanish Parliament itself.

Sweden

The ordinary pre-existing legislation dealing with a large number of different areas (trade and industry, the labour market, social security, education etc.) has been amended by Parliament as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.

To obtain additional power the government in the beginning of April proposed Parliament a draft law amending the Act on Protection Against Contagious Diseases and providing for broader delegated powers to the government to impose restrictions on businesses, and to impose requirements on local and regional authorities to (re)distribute equipment and resources. The reasons given were that it was unclear whether the existing delegations in the actual pieces of legislation would be sufficient legal basis for the sort of measures that may prove necessary in the future. The draft delegation was widely formulated. However, the travaux préparatoires make it clear that the powers could not be used to introduce detention or restrictions in freedom of movement. The Council of Legislation, to which the draft was referred, proposed that the delegation should be framed in more specific terms. The standing Constitutional Committee of Parliament proposed that the power to issue government ordinances only be exercised where there was a clear need for speed in each particular case. The Committe also emphasized the importance of the Government making a proportionality assessment when issuing ordinances. Parliament adopted the law with these proposals. The law, which is temporary, expires June 30th, 2020. The first new provision (6a) in the Act provides that the government may issue “1. temporary restrictions on public gatherings; 2. temporary closure of shopping centers and other shopping venues; 3. temporary closure of social and cultural meeting places; closure or other restrictions on transport or use of infrastructure, such as ports, airports or bus or railway stations; 5. temporary enabling of the mutual trade or redistribution of drugs or protective materials and other medical equipment for private healthcare providers and other private operators; or 6. temporary measures of a similar nature.” Under the new 6b “the government may issue special regulations on cooperation and mutual trade or redistribution of drugs and medical equipment in regions and local authorities, if it is necessary to maintain effective infection control to deal with the spread of the virus that causes covid-19”. The new 6c provides that regulations involving restrictions in civil rights (Article 6 ECHR) can be appealed against to the administrative courts. Finally, a requirement is made to submit regulations that have been issued on the basis of §6a or 6b immediately for approval of Parliament.

Switzerland

Not applicable (see Q2). Contrary to the situation during the Second World War, the Parliament has not adopted any "empowerment act". So, the Government is using the power to issue ordinance under either the Epidemics Act or Article 185 of the Constitution.

For example, it adopted Ordinance 2 on Measures to Combat the Coronavirus (COVID-19) (Verordnung 2 über Massnahmen zur Bekämpfung des Coronavirus (COVID-19)) which regulates the lockdown.

North Macedonia

There is no law on the state of emergency in Macedonia, and Parliament was not sitting during the crisis. However, the Government's decrees having the force of law have been adopted during this period

Tunisia

The existing legislative texts governing the state of emergency have not been amended. However, an organic law No. 2020-19 was passed on April 12, 2020, authorizing the head of government to intervene in the legislative field.

Turkey

The legislation on the state of emergency was not amended during the COVID-19 crisis

Ukraine

Several current laws of Ukraine were amended during the COVID crisis, to cope with it (for example, the law "On Principles of State Regulatory Policy in the Sphere of Economic Activity" September 11, 2003 № 1160-IV (amended), The Code of civil protection (No. 5403-VI of 2 October 2012) and the Law on protection of population against infectious diseases (No. 1645-III of 6 April 2000). On April 16th 2020 a law was enacted that permits authorized agencies to process personal data without the consent of the person for preventing the spread of COVID-19. The collected data may include information about health, place of hospitalization or observation, name, date of birth, residence, and work. The collection of personal data under that special procedure is limited by the period of the quarantine and is to be varnished at the end of the quarantine.

United Kingdom

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.

The CA was passed by the UK Parliament to make provision for the emergency. It is the chief legislative measure across the UK for dealing with the crisis. It passed through Parliament with cross-party support and passed the House of Commons without a vote. The CA’s temporary and exceptional nature is indicated by two provisions: the major provisions of the Act will cease to apply after two years (s. 89). This can be extended, but only by six months at a time (s. 90(2)-(3)). There is a power to bring forward the expiry date of the Act (s. 90(1)).

The Act is subject to six-monthly parliamentary review (s. 98), at which point the House of Commons may decline to accede to a motion that the CA not yet expire. If the House so declines, the power in s. 90(1) must be exercised to bring forward the expiry date of the CA to not later than 21 days after the rejection.

The Scottish Parliament has passed two acts dealing with assorted social protection challenges caused by the crisis: the Coronavirus (Scotland) Act 2020 and the Coronavirus (Scotland) (No. 2) Act 2020. The Northern Ireland Assembly has passed an Act protecting tenants from eviction and granting the executive certain associated regulation-making powers: the Private Tenancies (Coronavirus Modifications) (Northern Ireland) Act 2020.

United States of America

At Federal Level: Congress has responded to the COVID-19 pandemic in several ways. Congress passed the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2020 on March 6, 2020, providing $8.3 billion to respond to the pandemic. Another bill was passed by Congress on March 18, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act. On March 27, 2020, a massive coronavirus relief package called the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Trump, under which $2 trillion was allocated to help the country deal with the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic.

At State Level:

GA: No COVID-19 bills (presumably due to the suspension of the legislative session).

NE: No COVID-19 bills (presumably due to the suspension of the legislative session).

NY: On March 17, 2020, the New York Assembly proposed a bill to fight the COVID-19 pandemic by providing sick leave and job protection to those affected by the economic fallout of the pandemic. Although Governor Cuomo expressed skepticism that the legislature would be able to legislate further (due to the suspension of the session), state lawmakers were ready with dozens of coronavirus-related bills when the session suspension ended.

WA: In response to COVID-19, Washington state adjusted the Shared Leave Program to allow leave if an employee or someone who lives in the employee’s household is isolated or quarantined by a public health official or healthcare provider due to the virus. This change was enacted on March 17, 2020. The state had previously (on March 2) enacted legislation on Healthy Practices to Reduce the Spread of Flu, which encouraged the dissemination of information about how to limit the spread of flu and other viruses, including COVID-19.

WI: The Wisconsin Legislature passed a coronavirus response bill during the week of April 14, 2020, ensuring that enough state funds would be raised to fight the pandemic on a state level. The vote “marked the first time in Wisconsin's 172-year history that lawmakers convened a session with members participating remotely. Legislative rules require lawmakers to be present to debate and vote on bills. However, a law passed in 2009 allowed for holding virtual sessions during disasters.” Furthermore, the Wisconsin Legislature sued Secretary-designee Palm to have the Wisconsin Supreme Court declare unconstitutional the extension of the stay-at-home order.