Rule of Law and Democratic Decline During States of Emergency – The Case of the Czech Republic

Jana Janderová

doi:10.17573/cepar.2024.2.03

Authors

Jana Janderová University of Pardubice, Faculty of Economics and Administration, Czechia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6425-673X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2024.2.03

Keywords:

compensation bonus, democratic decline, state of emergency, proportionality, right to education, rule of law

Abstract

Purpose: This paper analyses the impact of the state of emergency declared during the Covid-19 pandemic on public administration, specifically focusing on the Czech Republic. It aims to understand the correlation between the rule of law, the legitimacy of measures taken during the pandemic, and the public’s willingness to comply with these measures.
Design/Methodology/Approach: The paper employs a comparative study design, examining the consistency of pandemic measures with the core principles of the rule of law – legality, proportionality, and legitimate expectations. The study focuses on measures that restrict rights (e.g., right to education) and those that, conversely, grant rights (e.g., decisions on compensation bonuses). The methodology involves an analysis of the relevant case law, administrative practice, and data from several databases.
Findings: The study reveals frequent breaches of legality and proportionality, both in the restriction and granting of rights. Findings indicate that the public’s willingness to comply with measures decreased when these were perceived as illegitimate. This was evident in the Czech Republic where, despite the persistence of most measures, the situation worsened during the autumn 2020 and spring 2021 waves of the pandemic.
Practical Implications: The findings of this study have significant implications for public administration and policymaking, especially during times of crisis and declared state of emergency. The results highlight the importance of maintaining the rule of law and ensuring the legitimacy of public compliance measures. The study suggests that disregard for these principles can lead to a decline in public trust and cooperation, exacerbating the crisis.
Originality/Value: This paper provides a unique perspective on the management of the Covid-19 pandemic, linking the rule of law with public compliance. It offers valuable insights for governments and policymakers on the importance of maintaining legality and proportionality in their measures, and the potential consequences of their disregard. What sets this study apart is its comprehensive analysis of both cases where rights were reduced (such as limitations of the right to education) and cases where rights were provided (such as the granting of compensation bonuses). This dual-focused approach offers a more holistic view of the impact of governmental measures during the pandemic. The study’s findings contribute to the broader understanding of crisis management and the role of public administration. This comprehensive approach enhances the originality and value of the research, making it a significant contribution to the field.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Addink, H. (2019). Good Governance Concept and Content. Oxford: Oxford university press.

2. Beqiraj, J. and Moxham, L. (2022). Reconciling the Theory and the Practice of the Rule of Law in the European Union Measuring the Rule of Law. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 14, pp. 139–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-022-00171-z

3. Berger, T. and Lake, M. (2018). Human Rights, the Rule of Law, and Democracy. In A. Draude et al., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Governance and Limited Statehood. Oxford University Press, pp. 416-437.

4. Bouckaert, G et al. (2020). European Coronationalism? A Hot Spot Governing a Pandemic Crisis. Public Administration Review, 80(5), pp. 765-773. https://doi: 10.1111/puar.13242

5. Christiansen, T. and Laegreid, P. (2020) Balancing Governance Capacity and Legitimacy: How the Norwegian Government Handled the COVID-19 Crisis as a High Performer. Public Administration Review, 80(5). pp. 774-779. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13241

6. Czech Supreme Administrative Court decision file No. 10 Ao 2/2021-107 of 2nd June 2021.

7. Czech Supreme Administrative Court decision file No. 8 Ao 16/2021-124 of 23rd June 2021.

8. Czech Supreme Administrative Court decision file No. 8 Ao 1/2021-133 of 14th April 2021.

9. Czech Supreme Administrative Court decision file No. 6 Ao 11/2021-48 of 22nd April 2021.

10. Czech Supreme Administrative Court decision file No. 5 Ao 1/2021-65 of 6th May 2021.

11. Decision of the Czech Constitutional Court file No. Pl. ÚS 7/20 of 21 April 2020.

12. Decision of the Czech Constitutional Court file No. Pl. ÚS 8/20 of 22 April 2020.

13. Decision of the Czech Constitutional Court file No. Pl. ÚS 11/20 of 19th May 2020.

14. Decision of the Czech Constitutional Court file No. Pl. ÚS 106/20 of 9th February 2020.

15. Explanatory note to the Act No. 94/2021 Coll., on Extraordinary Measures During the Epidemic of the COVID-19 Disease (the Pandemic Act). At< https://www.aspi.cz/products/lawText/7/289937/1/2/duvodova-zprava-c-lit289937cz-duvodova-zprava-k-zakonu-c-94-2021-sb-o-mimoradnych-opatrenich-pri-epidemii-onemocneni-covid-19-a-o-zmene-nekterych-souvisejicich-zakonu, accessed 1 August 2024.

16. Fuka, J. and Bat'a, R. (2024). The role of public sector policy in sustainable energy efficiency: an application of dynamic modelling. Territory, Politics, Governance, 12(5), pp. 690 -709. https://doi:10.1080/21622671.2022.2055630

17. Grogan, J. (2022). COVID-19, The Rule of Law and Democracy. Analysis of Legal Responses to a Global Health Crisis. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 14, pp. 349–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-022-00168-8

18. Hejč, D. (2020). Nezákonnost mimořádných opatření ministerstva zdravotnictví k onemocnění covid-19 podle MS v Praze: když obsah překračuje formu. Soudní rozhledy, 6, pp. 185.

19. Hejč, D. and Svoboda, T. (2021). Zákon o mimořádných opatřeních při epidemii onemocnění COVID-19. Komentář. 1. vydání. Praha: C.H.Beck. p. 212.

20. Hofmann, H. C. H. et al. (2013). Administrative Law and Policy of the European Union. Oxford University Press, reprint, p. 977.

21. Horvat, M. et al. (2021). Public Administration’s Adaptation to COVID-19 Pandemic – Czech, Hungarian, Polish and Slovak Experience. Central European Public Administration Review, 19(1), pp. 133-158. https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2021.1.06

22. Janderová, J. (2019). Impact of the Rule of Law as a Fundamental Public Governance Principle on Administrative Law Interpretation in the Czech Republic. Central European Public Administration Review, 17(2), pp. 117-139. https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2019.2.06

23. Judgment of the Municipal Court in Prague file No.10 A 35/2020 of 7th May 2020.

24. Judgment of the Regional Court in Plzeň file No.77 A 27/2021-199 of 12th May 2021.

25. Keisler, I., Lobotka, A. and Kotulková, L. (2020). Covid-19: Přijatá opatření a náhrada újmy. Praha: Wolters Kluwer.

26. Klimovský, D., Malý, I. and Němec, J. (2021). Collaborative Governance Challenges of the COVID-19 Pandemics: Czech Republic and Slovakia. Central European Public Administration Review, 19(1), pp. 85-106. https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2021.1.04

27. Klimovský, D. and Němec, J. (2021). The Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Responses from Various Policy Actors in the Czech Republic and Slovakia in 2020: An Introduction to a Special Issue. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, Series D: Faculty of Economics and Administration, 29(1), p. 1255. https://doi.org/10.46585/sp29011255

28. Klimovský, D., Němec, J. and Bouckaert, G. (2021). The COVID-19I Pandemic in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, Series D: Faculty of Economics and Administration, 29(1), p. 1320. https://doi.org/10.46585/sp29011320

29. Kobík, J. (2017). Daňový proces: judikatura k problémovým situacím. Olomouc: ANAG.

30. Koca, Z. (2022). Government Responses to COVID-19: A Comparative Analysis of Visegrad Countries. Central European Public Administration Review, 20(1), pp. 57-84. https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2022.1.03

31. Kouba, S. (2007). Systém principů daňového práva. Praha: Wolters Kluwer.

32. Lichnovský, O. (2021). Daňový řád: komentář. 4. vydání. Praha: C. H. Beck. Beckova edice komentované zákony.

33. Lührmann, A. and Rooney, B. (2020). Autocratization by Decree: States of Emergency and Democratic Decline. V-Dem Working Paper 85, 2nd Edition, https://ssrn.com/abstract=3582527 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3582527

34. Mizrahi, S., Vigoda-Gadot, E. and Cohen, N. (2021). How Well Do They Manage a Crisis? The Government’s Effectiveness During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Public Administration Review, 81(6), pp. 1120-1130. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13370.

35. Moon, M. J. (2020). Fighting COVID-19 with Agility, Transparency, and Participation: Wicked Policy Problems and New Governance Challenges. Public Administration Review, 80(4), p. 651-656. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13214

36. Němec, J., Drechsler, W. and Hajnal, G. (2021) Public Policy during COVID-19: Challenges for Public Administration and Policy Research in Central and Easter Europe. The NISPACee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 13(2), pp. 11 – 22. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2020-0011

37. Ondřejek, P. (2024). Analýza judikatury Nejvyššího správního soudu týkající se požadavků na odůvodnění opatření podle tzv. Pandemického zákona. Acta Universitatis Carolinae – Iuridica, 70(3), pp. 9 – 29. https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2024.135

38. Pech, L. (2022). The Rule of Law as a Well-Established and Well-Defined Principle of EU Law. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 14, pp. 107–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-022-00176-8

39. Radu, B. (2022). Building and Maintaining Trust in Public Institutions during the Coronavirus pandemic. A Theoretical Perspective. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 66(4), pp. 64 - 80. https://doi.org/10.24193/tras.66E.4

40. Sever, T., Rakar I. and Kovac, P. (2015). Protecting Human Rights through Fundamental principles of Administrative Procedures in Eastern Europe. DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, 5 (4), pp. 249–275. https://doi.org/10.2478/danb-2014-0014

41. Sunkin, M. and Marsons, L. (2022). Directions for Future Research on Administrative Justice. In: M. Hertogh et al., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Administrative Justice, Oxford Handbooks, pp. 647 – 672.

42. Špaček, D. (2020). COVID-19 – National Government Approach in the Czech Republic. In P. Joyce, F. Maron, and P. S. Reddy, eds. Good Public Governance in a Global Pandemic, Brussels: IIAS-IISA, pp. 259–268. https://doi.org/10.46996/pgs.v1e1

43. Venice Commission (2016). CDL-AD(2016)007-e Rule of Law Checklist, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 106th Plenary Session (Venice, 11-12 March 2016), available at: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2016)007-e

44. Vyhnánek, L. et al. (2024). The Dynamics of Proportionality: Constitutional Courts and the Review of COVID-19 Regulations. German Law Journal, 25(3), pp. 386–406. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2023.96

45. Wintr, J. (2020). K ústavnosti a zákonnosti protiepidemických opatření na jaře 2020. Správní právo, 53(5-6), pp. 282–297.