No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
States of Emergency, Simultaneous Overreach and Underreach and the COVID-19 Pan(dem)ic
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 December 2023
Abstract
Previous research has neglected how repeated declarations of states of emergency (SsoE) in response to the same emergency may combine with executive overreach and underreach within a single jurisdiction, undermining the authority of the SsoE as a legal institution and increasing the vulnerability of the constitutional system as a result. This article examines how decision-makers’ commitment to a culture of justification is central to avoiding emergency mismanagement via underreach, overreach or their combination. The simultaneous instances of executive overreach and underreach as emergency management failures are studied via the Slovak case, which was celebrated for its initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic but castigated for its failure to contain the subsequent waves. The analysis of the legal framework of the SsoE and the justifications for SsoE declarations uncovers the lack of justifications for the patterns of simultaneous executive underreach and overreach, underscoring the elusiveness of these categories. The limited justifications for the decisions demonstrated by the “government in panic” point to the undermining of the SsoE as a legal institution. The article concludes with highlighting how leaders’ role conceptions as democratic emergency managers might be necessary to sustain the authority of the SsoE.
Keywords
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
1 All online sources were accessible as of 30 August 2023.
2 See F Paddeu and M Waibel, “The Final Act: Exploring the End of Pandemics” (2020) 114 American Journal of International Law 698, 706.
3 D Innerarity, “Political Decision-Making in a Pandemic” in G Delanty (ed.), Pandemics, Politics, and Society (Berlin, De Gruyter 2021).
4 As Grogan puts it: “In such a complex, polycentric and multifaceted emergency as the global COVID-19 pandemic, a central question was who should be the dominant decision-maker, and how should decisions be made.” J Grogan, “COVID-19, the Rule of Law and Democracy. Analysis of Legal Responses to a Global Health Crisis” (2022) 14 Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 349, 352.
5 CA Heimer and C Davis, “Good Law to Fight Bad Bugs: Legal Responses to Epidemics” (2022) 18 Annual Review of Law and Social Science 1, 19 and references therein.
6 PW Kahn, “Democracy and the Obligations of Care: A Demos Worthy of Sacrifice” in MP Maduro and PW Kahn (eds), Democracy in Times of Pandemic: Different Futures Imagined (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2020) pp 198–200.
7 For an early account of the significance of public communication, with reference to a broader range of actors (including media), see S Chakraborty, “How Risk Perceptions, Not Evidence, Have Driven Harmful Policies on COVID-19” (2020) 11 European Journal of Risk Regulation 236, 237–38.
8 A Greene, Emergency Powers in a Time of Pandemic (Bristol, Bristol University Press 2020) p 9.
9 R Uitz, “Constitutional Practices in Times ‘After Liberty’” in A Sajó, R Uitz and S Holmes (eds), Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism (Abingdon-on-Thames, Routledge 2021) pp 451–52.
10 L Gruszczynski, M Zatoński and M McKee, “Do Regulations Matter in Fighting the COVID-19 Pandemic? Lessons from Poland” (2021) 12 European Journal of Risk Regulation 739.
11 M Kneuer and S Wurster, “Democratic Health in the Corona Pandemic. The Corona Pandemic as a Trigger or Amplifier of Democratic Erosion or Autocratization?” (2022) 16 Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 615, 616.
12 S Wamsler et al, “The Pandemic and the Question of National Belonging: Exposure to Covid-19 Threat and Conceptions of Nationhood” (2023) 62 European Journal of Political Research 510.
13 O Gross, “Emergency’s Challenges” in R Albert and Y Roznai (eds), Constitutionalism Under Extreme Conditions: Law, Emergency, Exception (Berlin, Springer 2020) pp 439–43.
14 C Bjørnskov and S Voigt, “This Time Is Different? On the Use of Emergency Measures during the Corona Pandemic” (2022) 54 European Journal of Law and Economics 63, 74.
15 P Guasti and L Buštíková, “Pandemic Power Grab” (2022) 38 East European Politics 529; K Kovács, “The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Pretext for Expanding Power in Hungary” in J Grogan and A Donald (eds), Routledge Handbook of Law and the COVID-19 Pandemic (Abingdon-on-Thames, Routledge 2022).
16 S Thomson and EC Ip, “COVID-19 Emergency Measures and the Impending Authoritarian Pandemic” (2020) 7 Journal of Law and the Biosciences lsaa064, 32.
17 Tellingly, the first chapter of an early collection on the pandemic discusses the “crisis of democratic leadership” as part of a “crisis of democratic governance” in representative democracies. N Walker, “The Crisis of Democratic Leadership in Times of Pandemic” in MP Maduro and PW Kahn (eds), Democracy in Times of Pandemic: Different Futures Imagined (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2020).
18 Eg J Ferejohn and P Pasquino, “The Law of the Exception: A Typology of Emergency Powers” (2004) 2 International Journal of Constitutional Law 210.
19 DE Pozen and KL Scheppele, “Executive Underreach, in Pandemics and Otherwise” (2020) 114 American Journal of International Law 608.
20 HP Graver, “Baselining COVID-19: How Do We Assess the Success or Failure of the Responses of Governments to the Pandemic?” in J Grogan and A Donald (eds), Routledge Handbook of Law and the COVID-19 Pandemic (Abingdon-on-Thames, Routledge 2022) pp 223–24.
21 Pozen and Scheppele, supra, note 19, 610.
22 ibid, 609.
23 ibid. A similar edited volume chapter by the authors is referred to when it provides additional claims. KL Scheppele and D Pozen, “Executive Overreach and Underreach in the Pandemic” in MP Maduro and PW Kahn (eds), Democracy in Times of Pandemic: Different Futures Imagined (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2020).
24 G Halmai, “The Pandemic and Constitutionalism” (2022) 4 Jus Cogens 303, 309.
25 N Ben-Asher, “The Emergency Next Time” (2022) 18 Stanford Journal of Civil Rights & Civil Liberties 51.
26 J Atiles and D Whyte, “Reproducing Crises: Understanding the Role of Law in the COVID-19 Global Pandemic” (2023) 45 Law & Policy 238, 248–49.
27 Two others not addressed here pertain to “underreach” and “overreach” by actors other than executives and the distinction between negative and positive rights. On the latter, Pozen and Scheppele claim that underreach infringes upon positive rights while overreach violates negative rights (Pozen and Scheppele, supra, note 19, 614). However, overreach might also violate positive rights – for example, undermining access to education due to rapid transition to digital learning without supplying pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds with the necessary technical infrastructure.
28 “[E]xecutive responses to COVID-19 do not reflect a clear pattern of either overreach or underreach in the aggregate”; ibid, 611.
29 Cf. VC Jackson and Y Dawood (eds), Constitutionalism and a Right to Effective Government? (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2022).
30 M Ignatieff, “The Reckoning: Evaluating Democratic Leadership” in MP Maduro and PW Kahn (eds), Democracy in Times of Pandemic: Different Futures Imagined (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2020) p 90.
31 J Grogan and A Donald, “Lessons for a ‘Post-Pandemic’ Future” in J Grogan and A Donald (eds), Routledge Handbook of Law and the COVID-19 Pandemic (Abingdon-on-Thames, Routledge 2022) p 473.
32 J-W Müller, “Populism versus Democracy during a Pandemic: Some Preliminary Considerations” in MC Kettemann and K Lachmayer (eds), Pandemocracy in Europe: Power, Parliaments and People in Times of COVID-19 (Oxford, Hart Publishing 2021) pp 323–24.
33 Heimer and Davis, supra, note 5, 13.
34 Pozen and Scheppele, supra, note 19, 614–15.
35 ibid, 615.
36 S Chambers, “Theories of Political Justification” (2010) 5 Philosophy Compass 893; M Cohen-Eliya and I Porat, “Proportionality and the Culture of Justification” (2011) 59 The American Journal of Comparative Law 463; D Dyzenhaus, “What Is a ‘Democratic Culture of Justification’?” in M Hunt, H Hooper and P Yowell (eds), Parliaments and Human Rights: Redressing the Democratic Deficit (Oxford, Hart Publishing 2015) pp 425–27; C Misak, “A Culture of Justification: The Pragmatist’s Epistemic Argument for Democracy” (2008) 5 Episteme 94.
37 Eg A Gutmann, “Democracy, Philosophy, and Justification” in C Koggel (ed), Moral Issues in Global Perspective – Volume 1: Moral and Political Theory (2nd edition, Peterborough, ON, Broadview Press 2006); D Seedhouse, The Case for Democracy in the COVID-19 Pandemic (London, SAGE 2020).
38 C Holder, “Justification” in A Besussi (ed), A Companion to Political Philosophy: Methods, Tools, Topics (Farnham, Ashgate 2012).
39 Cf. P Selznick, “’Law in Context’ Revisited” (2003) 30 Journal of Law and Society 177.
40 R van Gestel, H-W Micklitz and EL Rubin, “Introduction” in R van Gestel, H-W Micklitz and EL Rubin (eds), Rethinking Legal Scholarship (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2016).
41 L Buštíková and P Baboš, “Best in Covid: Populists in the Time of Pandemic” (2020) 8 Politics and Governance 496, 502–03; M Pažma and P Hardoš, “Capturing Populist Elements in Mediated Discourse: The Case of the 2020 Slovak Parliamentary Elections” (2023) 9 Intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics 23.
42 D Bohle and E Eihmanis, “East Central Europe in the COVID-19 Crisis” (2022) 38 East European Politics 491, 501–02; T Popic and AD Moise, “Government Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Eastern and Western Europe: The Role of Health, Political and Economic Factors” (2022) 38 East European Politics 507.
43 S Henčeková and Š Drugda, “Slovakia: Change of Government under COVID-19 Emergency” (Verfassungsblog, 22 May 2020) <https://verfassungsblog.de/slovakia-change-of-government-under-covid-19-emergency/>.
44 M Orzechowski, M Schochow and F Steger, “Balancing Public Health and Civil Liberties in Times of Pandemic” (2021) 42 Journal of Public Health Policy 145; G Hajnal, I Jeziorska and ÉM Kovács, “Understanding Drivers of Illiberal Entrenchment at Critical Junctures: Institutional Responses to COVID-19 in Hungary and Poland” (2021) 87 International Review of Administrative Sciences 612; G Bobba and N Hubé (eds), Populism and the Politicization of the COVID-19 Crisis in Europe (London, Palgrave Macmillan 2021) chs 7, 9.
45 Constitutional Act on State Security at the Time of War, State of War, State of Exception, and State of Emergency No. 227/2002 Coll.
46 Art 5 sec 2 of the Act.
47 Art 129 sec 6 of the Constitution.
48 M Steuer, “The Extreme Right as a Defender of Human Rights? Parliamentary Debates on COVID-19 Emergency Legislation in Slovakia” (2022) 11 Laws 17.
49 PL. ÚS 4/2021 (8 December 2021). “[…] isolation outside home environment (in a healthcare facility or other designated facility) amounts to deprivation of personal freedom” (sec 182).
50 See J Nemec, I Maly and T Chubarova, “Policy Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Potential Outcomes in Central and Eastern Europe: Comparing the Czech Republic, the Russian Federation, and the Slovak Republic” (2021) 23 Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 282.
51 JHC Wong, “Government Emergency Responses During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Context of Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management: A Comparative Study” in SXB Zhao et al (eds), COVID-19 Pandemic, Crisis Responses and the Changing World: Perspectives in Humanities and Social Sciences (London, Palgrave Macmillan 2021).
52 See, eg, L d’Andrea and A Declich, “Covid-19 and Science: Italy and Late Modernity” in JN Pieterse, H Lim and H Khondker (eds), Covid-19 and Governance: Crisis Reveals (Abingdon-on-Thames, Routledge 2021).
53 M Steuer, “Slovak Constitutionalism and the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Implications of State Panic” (IACL-IADC Blog, 9 April 2020) <https://blog-iacl-aidc.org/2020-posts/2020/4/9/slovak-constitutionalism-and-the-covid-19-pandemic-the-implications-of-state-panic>.
54 D Klimovský, J Nemec and G Bouckaert, “The COVID-19 Pandemic in the Czech Republic and Slovakia” (2021) 29 Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, Series D: Faculty of Economics and Administration 1; M Kovanič and M Steuer, “Fighting against COVID-19: With or without Politics?” (2023) 337 Social Science & Medicine 116297, 3.
55 Henčeková and Drugda, supra, note 43; Steuer, supra, note 53.
56 J Jalan and A Sen, “Containing a Pandemic with Public Actions and Public Trust: The Kerala Story” (2020) 55 Indian Economic Review 105.
57 J Gręndzińska et al, “Four Cases, the Same Story? The Roles of the Prime Ministers in the V4 Countries during the COVID-19 Crisis” (2022) 18 Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences 28, 36–39.
58 Act No 414/2020 Coll.
59 V Anghel and E Jones, “Riders on the Storm: The Politics of Disruption in European Member States during the COVID-19 Pandemic” (2022) 38 East European Politics 551, 562–63.
60 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na vyhlásenie núdzového stavu UV-5965/2020 [Proposal to Declare a State of Emergency]” (15 March 2020) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/24589/1>.
61 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na rozšírenie núdzového stavu UV-6124/2020 [Proposal to Extend the State of Emergency]” (2020) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/24597/1>.
62 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na skončenie núdzového stavu UV-12317/2020 [Proposal to End the State of Emergency]” (2020) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/24954/1>.
63 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na vyhlásenie núdzového stavu UV-20941/2020 [Proposal to Declare a State of Emergency]” (2020) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/25338/1>.
64 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na zmenu času trvania núdzového stavu UV-24360/2020 [Proposal to Change the Duration of the State of Emergency]” (2020) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/25473/1>.
65 Scheppele and Pozen (supra, note 23, 39) note that leaders going on holidays during a time of imminent threat is an indicator of executive underreach.
66 E Holt, “COVID-19 Testing in Slovakia” (2021) 21 The Lancet Infectious Diseases 32; see also MD Jensen, K Lynggaard and M Kluth, “Comparing 31 European Countries’ Responses to the Covid-19 Crisis” in K Lynggaard, MD Jensen and M Kluth (eds), Governments’ Responses to the Covid-19 Pandemic in Europe: Navigating the Perfect Storm (Berlin, Springer 2023) p 461; K Staronova, N Lacková and M Sloboda, “Post-Crisis Emergency Legislation Consolidation: Regulatory Quality Principles for Good Times Only?” (2023) European Journal of Risk Regulation doi:10.1017/err.2023.69, 7.
67 R Ižip, “Pyrrhovo víťazstvo Igora Matoviča, v ktorom stratil to najcennejšie – dôveru [Pyrrhic Victory of Igor Matovič in Which He Lost the Greatest Value – Trust]” (Trend, 31 October 2020) <https://www.trend.sk/nazory-a-komentare/pyrrhovo-vitazstvo-igora-matovica-ktorom-stratil-to-najcennejsie-doveru>. The PM referred to those (experts, activists, journalists) questioning his decisions in a denigratory manner (“wisdom-shitters”).
68 In December 2021, the PM claimed that he does not “manage the coronavirus. The coronavirus manages us.”
Z Paráková, “Matovič: Bez podpory prezidentky nemám silu pretláčať ďalšie testovanie [Matovič: Without the President’s Support I Have No Strength to Push Further Testing]” (Správy RTVS, 7 December 2020) <https://spravy.rtvs.sk/2020/12/matovic-bez-podpory-prezidentky-nemam-silu-pretlacat-dalsie-testovanie/>.
69 M Steuer, “Slovakia’s Democracy and the COVID-19 Pandemic: When Executive Communication Fails” (Verfassungsblog, 26 February 2021) <https://verfassungsblog.de/slovakias-democracy-and-the-covid-19-pandemic-when-executive-communication-fails/>.
70 P Guasti and J Bílek, “The Demand Side of Vaccine Politics and Pandemic Illiberalism” (2022) 38 East European Politics 594, 606–07.
71 A Alemanno, “Taming COVID-19 by Regulation: An Opportunity for Self-Reflection” (2020) 11 European Journal of Risk Regulation 187, 194.
72 Guasti and Buštíková, supra, note 15, 543.
73 M Vavřík and S Qin, “Politicization of Anti-Pandemic Measures in Europe: Cleavage Politics and Divided Publics” in SXB Zhao et al (eds), Comparative Studies on Pandemic Control Policies and the Resilience of Society (Berlin, Springer 2023) p 196; on the narratives of the far right, see also Steuer, supra, note 48.
74 Pozen and Scheppele list Sweden as an example where, despite the non-implementation of many restrictions considered legitimate and necessary elsewhere, there was no underreach. They point out that the decisions of the authorities were “all justified in a deliberative fashion – under constraints imposed by the Swedish constitution” (supra, note 19, 612).
75 A Greene, “Emergencies and Illiberalism” in A Sajó, R Uitz and S Holmes (eds), Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism (Abingdon-on-Thames, Routledge 2021) p 568.
76 National Council of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh vlády na vyslovenie súhlasu NRSR s predĺžením núdzového stavu [Executive Petition for Parliamentary Consent to the Prolongation of the State of Emergency]” <https://www.nrsr.sk/web/Default.aspx?sid=zakony/cpt&ZakZborID=13&CisObdobia=8&ID=380>.
77 The remaining deputies (out of 150) did not participate at the voting.
78 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na predĺženie času trvania núdzového stavu UV-27966/2020 [Proposal to Prolong the State of Emergency]” (2020) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/25610/1>.
79 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na opakované predĺženie času trvania núdzového stavu UV-2412/2021 [Proposal for a Repeated Prolongation of the State of Emergency]” (2021) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/25719/1>.
80 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na opakované predĺženie času trvania núdzového stavu UV-4890/2021 [Proposal for a Repeated Prolongation of the State of Emergency]” (2021) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/25827/1>.
81 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na opakované predĺženie času trvania núdzového stavu UV-7447/2021 [Proposal for a Repeated Prolongation of the State of Emergency]” (2021) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/25934/1>.
82 Government of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh na vyhlásenie núdzového stavu UV-27117/2021 [Proposal to Declare a State of Emergency]” (2021) <https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/26625/1>.
83 National Council of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh vlády na vyslovenie súhlasu NRSR s opakovaným predĺžením núdzového stavu [Executive Petition for Parliamentary Consent to the Repeated Prolongation of the State of Emergency]” <https://www.nrsr.sk/web/Default.aspx?sid=zakony/cpt&ZakZborID=13&CisObdobia=8&ID=430>. Eighty-three of the 108 MPs present (out of 150) endorsed the prolongation. This proposal, unlike the other two, was also reviewed by parliamentary committees (on constitutional affairs and on healthcare) but without any substantive remarks emerging from this review.
84 Government of the Slovak Republic, supra, note 79, 1–2.
85 PL. ÚS 10/2013 (10 December 2014).
86 Government of the Slovak Republic, supra, note 79, 3.
87 ibid, 3–4.
88 ibid, 4.
89 PL. ÚS 22/2020 (14 October 2020).
90 Government of the Slovak Republic, supra, note 79, 4–5.
91 It is unclear why this was not included in the main proposal. It seems as if the supplementary material was prepared by the ministry of justice, hence avoiding the endorsement requirement by the PM. Time constraints might also have played a role, as indicated by the number of grammatical errors in the material by the ministry.
92 National Council of the Slovak Republic, “Návrh vlády na vyslovenie súhlasu NRSR s opakovaným predĺžením núdzového stavu [Executive Petition for Parliamentary Consent to the Repeated Prolongation of the State of Emergency]” <https://www.nrsr.sk/web/Default.aspx?sid=zakony/cpt&ZakZborID=13&CisObdobia=8&ID=488>. Seventy-eight of the ninety-six MPs present (out of 150) endorsed the prolongation.
93 PL. ÚS 2/2021.
94 Government of the Slovak Republic, supra, note 80, 2.
95 ibid, 7.
96 This is evidenced by the gendered terms of “pater” and “man” in the concepts that the executive opted to invoke in this context, both referring to the (also gendered) “reasonable man” standard from English common law.
97 This duality is indirectly embraced by Pozen and Scheppele when they refer to the two functions of constitutions identified by Hannah Arendt: limiting power and constituting “effective power”. Scheppele and Pozen, supra, note 23, 47–52.
98 Emergency becomes more “a state of mind”; it can affect thinking in different directions, not just towards acceptance or endorsement of more restrictions on individual freedoms. H Vogt, “Covid-19 and Freedom” (2021) 60 Social Science Information 548, 552. See also Bjørnskov and Voigt, supra, note 14, 15: “[U]nderreach is not necessarily equivalent with the decision not to declare a state of emergency.”
99 Pozen and Scheppele, supra, note 19, 616–17.
100 Atiles and Whyte, supra, note 26.
101 The latter has a potential equivalent in existing scholarly discourse: judicial activism and judicial deference. The affinities and differences between these conceptual categories need further study.
102 K Möller, “Justifying the Culture of Justification” (2019) 17 International Journal of Constitutional Law 1078.
103 Eg F Cafaggi and P Iamicelli, “Global Pandemic and the Role of Courts” (2022) 1 Legal Policy & Pandemics: The Journal of the Global Pandemic Network 159; EPN Meyer, ULS dos Reis and BB de Castro, “Courts and COVID-19: An Assessment of Countries Dealing with Democratic Erosion” (2023) 5 Jus Cogens 85.
104 C Ansell, E Sørensen and J Torfing, “The COVID-19 Pandemic as a Game Changer for Public Administration and Leadership? The Need for Robust Governance Responses to Turbulent Problems” (2021) 23 Public Management Review 949; S Bergner, “The Role of the European Union in Global Health: The EU’s Self-Perception(s) within the COVID-19 Pandemic” (2023) 127 Health Policy 5; J Boswell et al, “The Comparative ‘Court Politics’ of Covid-19: Explaining Government Responses to the Pandemic” (2021) 28 Journal of European Public Policy 1258.
105 LH McHugh, MC Lemos and TH Morrison, “Risk? Crisis? Emergency? Implications of the New Climate Emergency Framing for Governance and Policy” (2021) 12 WIREs Climate Change e736.
106 See P Norris, In Praise of Skepticism: Trust but Verify (Oxford, Oxford University Press 2022) p 7.