, Russian Federation
UDK 34 Право. Юридические науки
GRNTI 10.07 Теория государства и права
During the COVID-19 pandemic public authorities have to implement a variety of measures to counter the spread of the disease, many of which involve human rights restrictions. One of the most common and at the same time sensitive way to respond to a pandemic is so-called lockdown. This term does not have a strict legal meaning; it covers a system of measures aimed at reducing social interactions between people. These measures include the requirement to maintain a “social distance” and not to leave home unless necessary, strict isolation for certain population groups, prohibition of various mass events and closure of many organizations, restriction of transport links between states and regions within the country. Based on the analysis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the author discusses the problems of compatibility of these restrictions with the provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Most of these measures can be justified in accordance with the Convention if they are taken in order to prevent the spread of coronavirus and protect public health, if they are lawful and reasonable in the context of epidemiological situation and proportionality (not excessiveness). Moreover, the implementation these measures can be considered as the fulfilment of the positive obligations by the countries-members of the Convention to protect the lives of persons under their jurisdiction.
human rights, COVID-19 pandemic, lockdown, restriction of freedom, positive obligations, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, European Court of Human Rights
1. Bjørnskov Ch., Voigt S. The Architecture of Emergency Constitutions // International Journal of Constitutional Law. – 2018. – Vol. 16. – Issue. 1. – P. 101–127.
2. Ginsburg T., Versteeg M. Binding the Unbound Executive: Checks and Balances in Times of Pandemic. (May 25, 2020) // SSRN. – URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3608974 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3608974 [Accessed 1 June 2020].
3. Dzehtsiarou K. COVID-19 and the European Convention on Human Rights. March 27, 2020 // Strasbourg Observer. – URL: https://strasbourgobservers.com/2020/03/27/covid-19-and-the-europeanconvention-on-human-rights/#more-4563 [Accessed 28 July 2020].
4. Hickman T., Dixon E., Jones R. Coronavirus and Civil Liberties in the UK // Blackstone Chambers. Covid-19: Legal Insights (6 April 2020). – URL: https://coronavirus.blackstonechambers.com/coronavirusand-civil-liberties-uk/ [Accessed 16 June 2020].
5. Greene A. Derogating from the European Convention on Human Rights in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic: If not Now, When? (April 14, 2020). European Human Rights Law Review 2020. // SSRN. URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3593358 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3593358 [Accessed 7 June 2020].
6. Mavronicola N. Positive Obligations in Crisis // Strasbourg Observers (7 April 2020). URL: https:// strasbourgobservers.com/2020/04/07/positive-obligations-in-crisis/ [Accessed 21 June 2020].
7. Leach P. Taking a Case to the European Court of Human Rights. – London: Blackstone Press Ltd., 2001. – 392 p.
8. Akandji-Kombe J.-F. Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. A Guide to the Implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Human Rights Handbooks. No. 7. – Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2007. – 68 p.
9. Stubbins Bates E. COVID-19 Symposium: Article 2 ECHR’s Positive Obligations – How Can Human Rights Law Inform the Protection of Health Care Personnel and Vulnerable Patients in the COVID-19 Pandemic? 01.04.2020 // OpinioJuris. – URL: http:// opiniojuris.org/2020/04/01/covid-19-symposiumarticle-2-echrs-positive-obligations-how-can-human-rights-law-inform-the-protection-of-health-carepersonnel-and-vulnerable-patients-in-the-covid-19-pandemic/ [Accessed 28 June 2020].
10. Coercive Human Rights. Positive Duties to Mobilise the Criminal Law under the ECHR / Ed. by L. Lavrysen and N. Mavronicola. – London: Hart Publishing, 2000. – 312 p.
11. Lazarus L. Positive Obligations and Criminal Justice: Duties to Protect or Coerce? University of Oxford. Legal Research Paper Series. Paper No. 41/2013. September 2012. // SSRN. – URL: http://file:///D:/ Downloads/SSRN-id2214508.pdf [Accessed 28 June 2020].
12. Scheinin M. COVID-19 Symposium: To Derogate or Not to Derogate? // Opinio Juris. – URL: https://opiniojuris.org/2020/04/06/covid-19-symposium-to-derogate-or-not-to-derogate/ [Accessed 28 June 2020].
13. Cortés-Arbeláez A. Pandemic and States of Emergency: A Comparative Perspective // Int’l J. Const. L. Blog, May 22, 2020. – URL: http://www.iconnectblog.com/2020/05/pandemic-and-states-of-emergencyacomparative-perspective/ [Accessed 1 June 2020].
