Constitutional court attitudes and the COVID-19 pandemic—case studies of Hungary, Serbia, and Croatia
The paper analyses the practice of the constitutional courts of Hungary, Serbia and Croatia, in terms of the constitutionality and legality of the normative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in the countries examined. The goal is to critically present the arguments along which the constitutional co...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2025-02-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Political Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpos.2025.1540881/full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832539883311202304 |
|---|---|
| author | Katinka Beretka Áron Ősze |
| author_facet | Katinka Beretka Áron Ősze |
| author_sort | Katinka Beretka |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The paper analyses the practice of the constitutional courts of Hungary, Serbia and Croatia, in terms of the constitutionality and legality of the normative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in the countries examined. The goal is to critically present the arguments along which the constitutional courts ensured (or attempted to achieve) the balance between the protection of fundamental rights and the preservation of the public interest and public health in their decisions related to the COVID-19 pandemic; and to deduce whether any similarities can be discovered in the reasoning of the courts or they have adopted a completely different approach from each other. According to the results of the legislative research, regional experience of the examined neighbouring countries with similar legal and political traditions, constitutional court structures, and political leadership styles shows that even in circumstances of a global, uniform health crisis, distinct national reactions might be expected. However, on the other side, the case law research gave a completely different conclusion, supporting the highly similar reasoning of the constitutional courts that almost without exception have given priority to public interest in combating the epidemic over fundamental rights. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-37afc81dc4f147cf92ca8ecf160ef7b9 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2673-3145 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-02-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Political Science |
| spelling | doaj-art-37afc81dc4f147cf92ca8ecf160ef7b92025-02-05T07:32:46ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Political Science2673-31452025-02-01710.3389/fpos.2025.15408811540881Constitutional court attitudes and the COVID-19 pandemic—case studies of Hungary, Serbia, and CroatiaKatinka Beretka0Áron Ősze1Faculty for Legal and Business Studies Dr. Lazar Vrkatic, Union University, Novi Sad, SerbiaDeák Ferenc Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Széchenyi István University, Győr, HungaryThe paper analyses the practice of the constitutional courts of Hungary, Serbia and Croatia, in terms of the constitutionality and legality of the normative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in the countries examined. The goal is to critically present the arguments along which the constitutional courts ensured (or attempted to achieve) the balance between the protection of fundamental rights and the preservation of the public interest and public health in their decisions related to the COVID-19 pandemic; and to deduce whether any similarities can be discovered in the reasoning of the courts or they have adopted a completely different approach from each other. According to the results of the legislative research, regional experience of the examined neighbouring countries with similar legal and political traditions, constitutional court structures, and political leadership styles shows that even in circumstances of a global, uniform health crisis, distinct national reactions might be expected. However, on the other side, the case law research gave a completely different conclusion, supporting the highly similar reasoning of the constitutional courts that almost without exception have given priority to public interest in combating the epidemic over fundamental rights.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpos.2025.1540881/fullCOVID-19constitutional courtHungarySerbiaCroatiaprotection of fundamental rights |
| spellingShingle | Katinka Beretka Áron Ősze Constitutional court attitudes and the COVID-19 pandemic—case studies of Hungary, Serbia, and Croatia Frontiers in Political Science COVID-19 constitutional court Hungary Serbia Croatia protection of fundamental rights |
| title | Constitutional court attitudes and the COVID-19 pandemic—case studies of Hungary, Serbia, and Croatia |
| title_full | Constitutional court attitudes and the COVID-19 pandemic—case studies of Hungary, Serbia, and Croatia |
| title_fullStr | Constitutional court attitudes and the COVID-19 pandemic—case studies of Hungary, Serbia, and Croatia |
| title_full_unstemmed | Constitutional court attitudes and the COVID-19 pandemic—case studies of Hungary, Serbia, and Croatia |
| title_short | Constitutional court attitudes and the COVID-19 pandemic—case studies of Hungary, Serbia, and Croatia |
| title_sort | constitutional court attitudes and the covid 19 pandemic case studies of hungary serbia and croatia |
| topic | COVID-19 constitutional court Hungary Serbia Croatia protection of fundamental rights |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpos.2025.1540881/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT katinkaberetka constitutionalcourtattitudesandthecovid19pandemiccasestudiesofhungaryserbiaandcroatia AT aronosze constitutionalcourtattitudesandthecovid19pandemiccasestudiesofhungaryserbiaandcroatia |