Abstract

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

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call