Follow & up.

I think the answer will be depends on the regulations stated by the government of each country. In general, all of public and private law still held. The public law is needed to maintain social stability and prevent the crime or riots.

Unfortunately, due to the SARS-COV-2 pandemic, legal solutions used so far have not stood the test of time. From the early 2020, as many as 46 out of 47 member states of the Council of Europe have decided to temporarily limit civil rights and freedoms. The regulations introduced in March and April 2020 make it possible to limit the vast majority of rights and freedoms on an unprecedented legal scale due to the need to preserve human health. In particular, freedom of movement, freedom of economic activity, right of access to court and freedom of religious practice have been radically limited.

It does impact tendering regulation and anti-competition regulation in several countries. For example the current rate of collaboration and requests from governments to have suppliers innovate is a clear example of this. (See UK, see US).

It will be interesting to see if the European Court of Human Rights gets the chance to opine and possibly look behind the reasoning behind decisions to suspend civil rights - particularly when Sweden has managed without.

The effect will differ from country to country. The type rule of law of each country will make a huge difference.

In South Africa the principle of ubuntu "humanity" as promotional to constitutionalism and constitutional sovereignty shall prevail. Loss of life or life should superseed economic loss or economy, this can in any event be resuscitated in a long run.

There are many Administrative and Constitutional law requirements under various national legal systems that are not rigorously considered before adopting Covid-19 regulations aimed at restricting movement and economic activity. Emergency powers exercised to controlled the pandemic should fall within the confines of the rule of law.

Many healthcare laws did not reflect on happenings and including the COVID-19 in the recent times. The present situation is changing from past to contemporary.

The pandemic regulations aimed at restricting movements and economy activity, the regulation will deal only with that pandemic, after that the regulation or the law ceases from operation. May be others might use that situation to alter rights that cannot be altered in the Constitution.

An emergency regulation may be altered at any time. The repeal of that regulation shall revive the previous law from the date of that repeal as if the the repealed regulation had not been made.

The emergency powers exercised to control the pandemic should fall within the purview of the rule of law. However the many States have their own laws (or rules).

Some states declared it a kind of "emergency situation" it is a constitutional public law case. And it has consequence in civil law in the jurisdiction. What say the judge: is it a vis maior and/or clausula rebus sic stantibus or not? Will the answer same or different in court, state and world level?

I agree with some of the responses above, most constitutions set conditions and restrictions on governments when exercising their exceptional powers in emergency situations, as in the case of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, hurricanes and epidemics, as well as in cases of riots and rebellion, etc. And the exercise of these powers depends on awareness, culture and a sense of responsibility for both the government and the people Equally, therefore, we find differences in the application of government measures to confront the covid19 pandemic. In general, the measures taken are in the interest of all humanity despite their effects on the economy of states and on the rights and freedoms of individuals . In Iraq we note that the conditions The current led to the delay in forming a government and a weak economy competent authorities were unable to put the budget in 2020 so far and paralysis of the official state institutions as well as companies and institutions of the private sector in addition to the courts ceased to consider the cases and bring down the financial rights due to force majeure.

Restrictions on human rights and freedoms during a pandemic are justified, as human life and health are of the highest value. However, from now on humanity must learn to live in a new way, to achieve a balance, on the one hand, in the legal protection of human life and health, on the other hand, to ensure the existence of an economy in a pandemic, and to prevent unjustified restrictions of democratic rights and freedoms. Public and private branches of law must adapt to this situation, develop new approaches and principles for its solution.

In Portugal, restrictions were and are necessary to maintain health care and stop the pandemic. The results are being quite positive and we are now rebuilding our economy and recovering work. With some limitations, but respecting human rights. We can say that Portugal is a good example of how to balance the risks of the pandemic with individual rights.

Fundamental Rights is not absolute. It is subject to certain derogation. One of such is in the case of emergency threatening public health through the spread of infectious disease. In that case Fundamental Rights to movement may be temporarily suspended to curtail the spread of the disease.

The impact in public law is limited by the Emergency Coronavirus Act 2020 that was passed by parliament, and created emergency (6 months) powers to the executive to suspended some basic human freedoms so as to appropriately respond and fight the pandemic. This without doubt had it's own effects on private law given that such powers suspended the performance of contracts for unspecified periods, and to neither of the parties fault therefore causing frustration (see Force Majuere). The forfeiture moratorium introduced by the Coronavirus Act 2020 should cover all this. This only applies to the UK

Dear Laszlo, attached please find my analysis on private law impact of covid-19 as force majeure. This is based on polish civil code, but lots of regulations are common.

Best Regards !

Every right acruing to persons may be suspended at emergency periods. The suspension of some rights albeit temporarily during this corona virus pandemic cannot be said to have been an infringement. It was necessary to guard public safety. Its effect ls on contract vary from country to country depending on the degree of enforcement of such the suspension.

Under the Constitution of the federal Republic of Nigeria and indeed all over the world, the rights of Citizens are subjected to certain limitations such as emergency threatening public health (in this case, COVID-19), war time, in order to protect another person's right among others. Therefore restriction of movement in order to curtail spread of COVID-19 is justified in the circumstance.

In case you can read Spanish, you will find a comparative overview over civil law responses to COVID-19 here: https://www.nreg.es/ojs/index.php/RDC.

The legislative response by New Zealand's Parliament to COVID-19 consists of the statutes which can be accessed at http://www.legislation.govt.nz/all/results.aspx?search=ts_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_COVID_resel_25_a&p=1. In respect of companies, incorporated societies and charitable trusts the COVID-19 Response (Requirements For Entities—Modifications and Exemptions) Act 2020 is of particular interest, and its implications are discussed in an article at https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_the_legal_and_regulatory_consequences_in_public_and_civil_law_of_Coronavirus_COVID-19.

In general, the impact of Covid-19 in public law is good because I know that many countries like Perú, Colombia, Argentina and others are checking their constitutional regimes of exception. For instance, many lawyers are questioning about the lockdown and the restrictions of rights, also, the analyses focused on the powers of president (or executive branch) because is dangerous the concentration of power in one person, it is incompatible with checks and balances, in special, in America Latina the problem is huge because many countries developed under strong presidential regimes. In that way, I consider the impact is positive because lawyers, politicians and citizens are being analyze problems related to power organization and whether the restrictions of rights are fine or there are some problems.

Pd. I'm writing a paper about the impact and role of public powers under the Covid-19 in Peru, in special, when lockdown started. If I finish very soon, I'll share.

In the context of disaster management Covid 19 countries are always present with regulations that refer to the state constitution as the legal basis for carrying out their functions and authorities serving their people. Regulations are made to provide legal certainty and at the same time as a handling strategy.

The President has issued Government Regulation No. 21 of 2020 concerning Large-Scale Social Restrictions (PSBB) is a limitation of certain occupation activities in an area suspected of being infected by Covid-19 to prevent its distribution. PSBB is carried out during the longest incubation period of 14 days. If there is still evidence of the spread of a new case, it can be extended within 14 days of the last case found (hukumonline.com. 11/5/2020).

This regulation is very important as a legal basis for social restrictions and mobility of space and freedom of society (human rights) can be done by law. Law Number 6 Year 2018 on Health Quarantine has provided a basis for types of health quarantine such as CBS and regional quarantine. Where local governments can submit PSBB requests to the center.

Restrictions can be in principle to prevent spread. Minister of Health Regulation No. 9 of 2020 concerning Large-Scale Social Limitation Guidelines in the Framework of Accelerating Handling of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (Covid-19). Covid 19 - odp, pdp, apd needs, there are still many people without symptoms (PWS)

Regulation on the determination of non-natural disasters with emergency status. Efforts to guarantee availability. WHO protocol. The real social conditions of the community have a direct impact, people who work in the informal sector and do not have fixed income.

Enforcement of large scale social limitation (PSBB) law enforcement in a number of areas, regional quarantine, social distancing, physical distancing. Lockdown. The role of other community stakeholders such as religious organizations, the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) which issues religious fatwas in the face of a pandemic, how religious people behave and worship in the midst of a pandemic in accordance with their respective religious rules.

The answer to you question needs to be streamlined . Covid 19 has seriously affected the both the civil law and the criminal law. For instance under civil are you looking on the impact of covid19 on the corporate sector, Contract related issues or Under Criminal law do you intend to discuss on the impact of the virus on the administration of justice?

Amendment contract base on hardship clause and force majeuer

I'll share an article I wrote on this subject

Follow & up.

The state of necessity originated by the Covid-19 brings as a consequence a change in all the legal instances of all the countries of the world and norms must be generated that avoid anarchy given the discontent of the most vulnerable sectors. We are all in the same boat, so we must think carefully about what standards should be a priority to save lives and then rescue the world economy. László Vértesy

Cek answer of your questions in https://hukumline.com/force-majeure-bisakah-pandemi-covid-19-dijadikan-alasan-tidak-bayar-hutang/

Education is expensive, but ignorance always costs more. So it is with Covid19. Government leaders are favoring big money and the unified voice of mainstream media that money buys, and politicians who are also sold out, while they ignore the Constitution that has done the US well when we follow it, and a couple principles like "by their fruits, ye shall know them."

As a physician, I know that the CDC is lying about vaccine safety became they have lied for decades about prescription drugs as a leading cause of death in the US due to Adverse Drug Reactions first reported as the 4th to 6th leading cause due to 106,000 deaths in hospitals. (Journal of American Medical Assoc, 4-15-98)

Two years later, 199,000 deaths in patients outside the hospital were reported by the Western Journal of Medicine, (June, 2000), making ADR's the #3 cause of death. Then the Annals of Internal Medicine reported a 2.7-fold increase in deaths from 1998 to 2005 multiplies 305,000 to become 824,000 and the #1 cause of death. But if one Google's CDC Top 10 Causes of Death, medical care or Adverse Drug Reactions are not mentioned.

I went thru US Senate offices with the above med journals until a senator said, "You are wasting your time--they own us," speaking of donations to their reelection by drug companies. CDC, Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates are liars for financial reasons involved with pharma making billions. Millions of women in Africa were sterilized by women who did not know Gates' vaccine would do it, and a half million kids in India got polio from his DPT vaccine. He admits a goal of depopulation. Vaccines are not safe. More on this issue at HealthHappinessDestiny.com

Emergency of new world order in name of COVID-19 has change the narrative of public and private law. Some provisions of public law are temporary suspended to curtail the spread of the virus while enforcement of some contacts is put on hold due force majure among others.

In Georgia Government Introduced Limitations in Every Day Life Of Civilians, As Well As Financial Penalties For Violations Of Adopted Standards

In Spain state of emergency (estado de alarma) was declared by the Government on March 14th and it has been extended until June 21st. Under this situation, indvidual freedom was restricted and very severe fines where charged for disobedience. Special regulation has been passed under this emergency framework so as to introduce special clauses in contracts and to suspend administrative and judicial procedures.

Initially there was great fear and willingness to do anything the gov't wanted to save our lives, but as the truth emerges like Italy saying 99% of those who died were elderly, mostly with pre-existing conditions like chronic lung, heart, diabetes who are on Rx drugs, (see LeadingCauseOfDeathPrescriptionDrugs.com ) and now CDC admits true fatality in US at 0.26% when including those who are asymptomatic, we now get a picture of vaccination tyranny to mark everyone and no freedom to travel or enter stores without proof of a vaccination that may be harmful--there are powerful forces trying to control the masses.

Necessity is the mother of all. Though many fundamental rights are suspended, still there is a dire neef to impose house arrests in countries, inspite of the fact that many contracts and obligations will not be fulfilled.

In case of breach of contractz the rescue for non fulfillment of contractual obligations is Act Of God, which turns the contract as void. So no legal proceedings can ensue. Everyone is suffering and losing some thing in this corona times. The businessmen and contractors, being one of them,be ready to accept the challenges

Absolutely I agree. In Indonesia, pandemic influence regulatory to provide a reasonable budget in public services. Goverment Contract cannot be implemented and many contract and obligation will not be fulfilled too@

In the area of air transportation in Nigeria for instance, Covid-19 induced cancellations of already booked flights as there was total ban of international and domestic carriage by air. This ordinarily should amount to breach of contract of carriage, entitling the passengers to be paid compensation.

However, in view of the definition of extraordinary circumstances in Section 1, Part 19 of the Nigeria Civil Aviation Regulations, 2015 such cancellations of flight having been caused by external, unpreventable and unpredictable factors (Covid-19) the carriers shall be excused from liability for monetary compensation to the passengers, so long as the cancellation was done within the period of the ban.

The coronavirus is increasingly having an impact on public and private law. Fundamental freedoms are restricted.

The Siracusa principles on the limitation and derogation provisions in the ICCPR provides authoritative guidance on governmental responses during times of emergencies. By it, no limitation or derogation shall be interpreted to jeopardize the essence of the right concerned. Rather, such limitation shall remain subject to the possibility of challenge and remedy against its abusive application. The covid19 response of some countries of the world such as Nigeria can be adjudged to have exceeded those limits. The economic rights of the citizenry has been neglected with aggravated consequences. Access to food and other rudiments of life has been truncated and nobody can do much about it.

in Indonesia, there are too many approaches to handling covid 19

I suggest two works on the theme of medical liability of our group:

Article COVID-19 and medical liability: Italy denies the shield to its heroes

Article Safety Recommendations and Medical Liability in Ocular Surge...

تغير مفهوم نظرية الضروف الطارئة والقوة القاهرة -

وجوب ايجاد أليات قانونية للتعاقد عبر الأنترنات -

Good discussion.

بوركت على الملاحظة

Necessity and its doctrine subdues legality in the face of the unforeseen. Thus, the impact of Covid19 on rights (public and civil law), which are restrictions in the exercise of rights (fundamental or otherwise) in most cases, cannot be construed to mean infringements on those rights except when its apparent. In Nigeria for example, the Constitution acknowledges restrictions and even derogation from the guaranteed fundamental rights in the event and need to protect public safety and public health (section 45 (1) (a) of the Constitution). Thus, the consequence of regulations on coronavirus is that state powers may hide under the law to fragrantly breach and infringe on the rights of the citizen. For example, the House of Representatives in Nigeria have proposed A bill seeking to replace the Quarantine Act with a Control of Infectious Disease Act that have quickly passed first and second readings at the House of Representatives in April, the proposed law has several adverse effect on the rights of the individuals and is causing outrage in Nigeria. Thus, the consequence of coronavirus laws are of eminent threat to human rights if not curtailed.

This is the result of so-called alien forces over which man has no control and which demand unplanned changes to our system of positive law. With this crisis we have all learned and it has forced us to improvise without this meaning that we renounce our fundamental rights, which will have to be evaluated almost on a case-by-case basis, country by country.

The whole essence of law and regulations lie in its ability to right public and private wrongs in the course of it being implemented. Covid 19 however opens us up to a very peculiar situation which makes enforcement of some of those laws daisy. For instance, apart from the issues of fundamental rights that are already curtailed by the forced but maybe necessary stay home orders, it also ensures that access to courts to challenge or seek redress for private and public wrongs is a near impossibility with courts also shut in many countries including Nigeria. So there are no avenues to even challenge the validity of some of the regulations which in some cases are human rights infringing. Moreso, it is difficult to debate against this noting that the virus spreads with gatherings and where the courts are open, it gives room for gatherings thereby opening the population up to the spread of the virus.

Another angle is the enforcement and prosecution of offenders of the regulations that seek to protect the larger public against the negligence of few individuals. We've seen instances where there are so many offenders and the authorities are unable to observe their own regulations on safe distancing. This is much so when it involves social influencers and star personalities where journalists, lawyers and other law enforcement agents are forced to breach their own protocols in a bid to bring other offenders to book.

In sum, covid 19 came with it's chaotic influence on the rule of law in public and private law parlance and lays bare the fire need to infuse IT in our justice system. Majority of these issues of law in times of a pandemic like this will be sorted where our courts are effectively and effectually virtual.

بموجب القانون القانون الدولة مكفلة بحماية النظام العام ولا سيما اهم عناصرها الصحة العامة. فشلت دول العالم في هذا المجال ذلك في عدم تمكنها من حماية الانسان من كوفيد ١٩ ...كما ان الدول قامت بتقييد الحريات العامةً بحجر المواطنين في منازلهم من دون تعويضهم بمتطلبات المعيشة كذلك عدم تهيئة المستشفيات بشكل يستوعب اكثر عدد من المصابين ..باختصار الدولة تتحمل المسؤلية القانونية بعدم تعويض المواطنين.

اما في القانون المدني فان التزامات المواطنين تكون الايفاء بها اصعب من الظروف الاعتيادية ولا يكون مستحيلاً عليه يتطلب تطبيق نظرية القوة القاهرة على التزامات جميع الاطراف ولاسيما في مجالات العقودفي فترة انتشار كوفيد ١٩.وذلك اما بامكان اعفاء او تحلل من بعض الالتزامات...

Two main impacts: human rights infringement and contractual concerns.

On human rights infringement, even constitutionally and internationally guaranteed rights of people are threatened. We need to find a sustainable balance between restrictions during pandemics and human rights protection -- something like a human-rights based approach to fighting and mitigating pandemics. The process of finding such would be tough yet delicate.

On contractual issues, most contracts do not include pandemics (local or global) and the degree or level of severity within the definition of force majeure. Since the current global health crisis, many lawyers (like myself) are advising clients to envisage pandemics as an instance of force majeure in their contractual dealings.