THE ROLE OF THE CZECH, SLOVAK, AND POLISH OMBUDSMAN DURING THE FIRST WAVE OF THE COVID-19 EPIDEMIC
THE ROLE OF THE CZECH, SLOVAK, AND POLISH OMBUDSMAN DURING THE FIRST WAVE OF THE COVID-19 EPIDEMIC

Summary/Abstract: This article is focusing on the role of Ombudsman institutions in Central Europe during the Coronavirus crisis. Special attention is given to the Czech, Slovak and Polish case law and activities of the Ombudsman. Although similarities are verified in the structure, institutional and social background of national Ombudsman institutions, this paper highlights the differences in their case law in handling the largest medical crisis of the twenty-first century. In this article we elaborate on the role of Ombudsman in Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Poland during the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic in 2020, and the nature of the cases and complaints they focused on. The post-transitional constitution-making (after 1989, the fall of Communism) and subsequent constitutional amendments resulted in the establishment (foundation) of Ombudsman institutions in all Central European countries. Although the Ombudsman institution has common roots in all these countries, essentially Scandinavian in origin, the national terminology varies somewhat. In Hungary, for example, the Ombudsman institution was traditionally known as the Parliamentary Commissioner, however after the constitutional changes in 2011/2012 the Hungarian Ombudsman lost its reference to the „Parliament” and is called Commissioner for Fundamental Rights. In Poland, the Ombudsman is called the Advocate for Citizens’ Rights. In the Czech Republic and Slovakia, which shared a common state (Czechoslovakia, 1918- 1992) and legal history, this institution is known as the Public Defender of Rights. Despite the differences in terminology, the word Ombudsman is most commonly used by the Central European press and professionals, and even scholars.

• Details
• Contents