2024
The Dynamics of Proportionality: Constitutional Courts and the Review of COVID-19 Regulations
VYHNÁNEK, Ladislav, Anna BLECHOVÁ, Michael BÁTRLA, Jakub MÍŠEK, Tereza NOVOTNÁ et. al.Základní údaje
Originální název
The Dynamics of Proportionality: Constitutional Courts and the Review of COVID-19 Regulations
Autoři
VYHNÁNEK, Ladislav (203 Česká republika, garant, domácí), Anna BLECHOVÁ (203 Česká republika, domácí), Michael BÁTRLA (203 Česká republika, domácí), Jakub MÍŠEK (203 Česká republika, domácí), Tereza NOVOTNÁ (203 Česká republika, domácí), Amnon REICHMAN (203 Česká republika) a Jakub HARAŠTA (203 Česká republika, domácí)
Vydání
German Law Journal, Lexington, Washington & Lee University School of Law, 2024, 2071-8322
Další údaje
Jazyk
angličtina
Typ výsledku
Článek v odborném periodiku
Obor
50500 5.5 Law
Stát vydavatele
Velká Británie a Severní Irsko
Utajení
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Impakt faktor
Impact factor: 1.300 v roce 2022
Organizační jednotka
Právnická fakulta
UT WoS
001163104300001
Klíčová slova anglicky
Constitutional courts; semiprocedural review; proportionality; COVID-19; separation of powers
Příznaky
Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změněno: 1. 10. 2024 09:39, JUDr. Mgr. Jakub Harašta, Ph.D.
Anotace
V originále
The COVID-19 pandemic has made it clear that even when using trusted legal tools, courts may run into challenging problems. Governments reacted to an unprecedented (at least in the context of post-WW2 era of fundamental rights) global crisis by adopting measures that drastically limited fundamental rights in order to protect the lives and health of many. Courts, of course, were entrusted with protecting fundamental rights against governmental overreach. The question was, how strict should the courts be when reviewing governmental acts. On the one hand, they could have relied on substantive proportionality assessment. This option, however was virtually ignored and most courts have opted for a deferential approach. This article analyzes both of these approaches, their strengths and weaknesses, but ultimately it argues that a third option - semiprocedural review - is the best way out of this judicial conundrum. Relying on comparative as well as theoretical arguments, it argues that semiprocedural review is the best way to deal with challenging empirical question - even under conditions of epistemological uncertainty.
Návaznosti
VI04000096, projekt VaV |
|