ABSTRACT Emergencies require governments to govern differently. In Australia, the changes wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic have been profound. The role of lawmaker has been assumed by the executive exercising broad emergency powers. Parliaments, and the debate and scrutiny they provide, have been marginalised. The COVID-19 response also has seen the medical-scientific expert metamorphose from decision-making input into decision-maker. Extensive legislative and executive decision-making authority has been delegated to them – directly in some jurisdictions; indirectly in others. Severe restrictions on an individual's freedom of movement, association and to earn a livelihood have been declared by them, or on their advice. Employing the analytical lens of regulatory legitimacy, this article examines and seeks to understand this shift from parliamentary sovereignty to autocratic technocracy. How has it occurred? Why has it occurred? What have been the consequences and risks of vesting significant legislative and executive power in the hands of medical-scientific experts; what might be its implications? The article concludes by distilling insights to inform the future design and deployment of public health emergency powers.

中文翻译：

---

大流行中的治理：从议会主权到专制的技术官僚主义

摘要 紧急情况要求政府采取不同的管理方式。在澳大利亚，COVID-19 大流行带来的变化是深远的。立法者的角色由行使广泛紧急权力的行政部门承担。议会及其提供的辩论和审查已被边缘化。COVID-19 响应还见证了医学科学专家从决策输入转变为决策者。广泛的立法和行政决策权已授予他们——直接在某些司法管辖区；间接地在别人身上。他们或根据他们的建议宣布对个人的行动自由、结社自由和谋生自由实行严格限制。利用监管合法性的分析视角，本文研究并试图理解这种从议会主权到专制技术官僚主义的转变。它是如何发生的？为什么会发生？将重要的立法和行政权力授予医学科学专家有什么后果和风险；它的含义是什么？文章最后总结了一些见解，为公共卫生应急权力的未来设计和部署提供信息。