ABSTRACT Extraordinary limitation of certain fundamental rights seems necessary in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. Many countries have declared a state of emergency for that purpose. Yet, there is also a risk of misusing the emergency for power grabbing, especially in the current era of executive aggrandizement, democratic decay and abusive populist constitutionalism. In this setting the legislative and judicial checks on the executive create a dilemma. Their standard operation in the state of emergency could control the executive, but might also impair its capacity to fight the pandemic effectively. This article therefore focuses on the desired role of the legislature and the judiciary in COVID-19 emergencies. Although many constitutions address emergencies, they are often vague and leave considerable room for the involved actors themselves to adjust their behaviour. This article asks how parliaments and courts should use this de facto room. I argue that they should show some deference to the executive, its level depending on the stage and severity of the crisis, but should not clear the field for governments. They must modify their activities but not suspend them. My main argument is that the deliberative and scrutiny functions of the legislature and the dispute-resolution function of courts are crucial not only for preventing the abuse of emergency measures, but also for increasing the effectiveness of emergency measures by improving conditions necessary for compliance. The legislature and courts can contribute to the higher feasibility and legitimacy of the emergency measures and thereby increase voluntary compliance, which is crucial for tackling the spread of the new coronavirus. The article illustrates these issues by way of the case study of the Czech Republic – a country experiencing its first nationwide state of emergency amid tendencies towards democratic decay and managerial populism.

中文翻译：

---

行政强化时代的 COVID-19 紧急情况：立法和司法检查的作用是什么？

摘要 在抗击 COVID-19 大流行的过程中，对某些基本权利的特别限制似乎是必要的。为此，许多国家已宣布进入紧急状态。然而，也存在滥用紧急状态来攫取权力的风险，尤其是在当前行政权强化、民主衰败和滥用民粹主义宪政的时代。在这种情况下，对行政部门的立法和司法检查造成了两难境地。他们在紧急状态下的标准操作可以控制行政部门，但也可能削弱其有效抗击大流行的能力。因此，本文重点介绍立法机关和司法机关在 COVID-19 紧急情况中应发挥的作用。尽管许多宪法处理紧急情况，它们往往含糊不清，为相关行为者自己调整行为留下了相当大的空间。本文询问议会和法院应如何使用这个事实上的房间。我认为，他们应该对行政部门表现出一定的尊重，其级别取决于危机的阶段和严重程度，但不应为政府扫清障碍。他们必须修改他们的活动，但不能暂停他们。我的主要论点是，立法机关的审议和审查职能以及法院的争端解决职能不仅对于防止滥用紧急措施至关重要，而且对于通过改善遵守必要条件来提高紧急措施的有效性也至关重要。立法机关和法院可以帮助提高紧急措施的可行性和合法性，从而增加自愿遵守，这对于应对新型冠状病毒的传播至关重要。本文通过对捷克共和国的案例研究来说明这些问题——捷克共和国在民主衰败和管理民粹主义的趋势中经历了第一次全国紧急状态。