P. Maldini
{"title":"Democracy in an Age of Pandemic: Civil and Human Rights and the Choice between Freedom and Safety","authors":"P. Maldini","doi":"10.5673/sip.59.3.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The health and economic crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has grown into a political crisis. It manifests itself primarily in challenges to the institutions of liberal democ-racy, particularly in ensuring a legitimate legal and political framework for action and crisis management in an emergency situation. This paper examines the implementation of public health measures to protect life and health (epidemiological measures, vaccinations), which by their very nature involve restrictions on civil liberties, and analyzes their legitimacy and appropriateness against the standards of liberal democracy. The theoretical and legal-political framework of the analysis is the relationship between freedom and safety, i.e. between the civil rights and liberties guaranteed in liberal democracy and the right to life and health as a fundamental human right. Based on the distinction between these two concepts and the analysis of the scope and manner of the implementation of public health measures – especially in the current context of the crisis of liberal democracy and the populist instrumentalization of civil rights for certain political goals and the state of infodemics – the specifics of this relationship are determined. Following the findings of this analysis, it is concluded that civil rights and human rights are not mutually exclusive, despite the competitive relationship and tension between individual liberty and public security – which is particularly emphasized in a pandemic situation. On the contrary, they complement each other and are prerequisites for each other. This path points to the possibilities of achieving a balance between them, and thus to the possibilities of overcoming the crisis caused by the pandemic. © 2021 Institut za društvena istraživanja u Zagrebu – Institute for Social Research in Zagreb Sva prava pridržana – All rights reserved.","PeriodicalId":39267,"journal":{"name":"Sociologija i Prostor","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociologija i Prostor","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5673/sip.59.3.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
大流行病时代的民主:公民权利与人权以及自由与安全之间的选择
COVID-19大流行引发的健康和经济危机已经演变为政治危机。它主要表现为对自由民主体制的挑战,特别是在确保在紧急情况下采取行动和管理危机的合法法律和政治框架方面。本文考察了保护生命和健康的公共卫生措施(流行病学措施、疫苗接种)的实施情况,这些措施本质上涉及对公民自由的限制,并根据自由民主的标准分析了这些措施的合法性和适当性。这一分析的理论和法律政治框架是自由与安全之间的关系,即自由民主制所保障的公民权利和自由与作为基本人权的生命权和健康权之间的关系。根据对这两个概念的区分和对公共卫生措施实施范围和方式的分析,特别是在当前自由民主危机和民粹主义将公民权利作为工具用于某些政治目标和信息传播状况的背景下,确定了这种关系的具体情况。根据这一分析结果,得出的结论是,公民权利和人权并非相互排斥,尽管个人自由与公共安全之间存在竞争关系和紧张关系——这在大流行病的情况下尤其突出。相反,二者相辅相成,互为前提。这条道路指出了在两者之间取得平衡的可能性,从而指出了克服这一流行病造成的危机的可能性。©2021 Institut za društvena istraživanja u Zagrebu -萨格勒布Sva prava社会研究所pridržana -保留所有权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。