CYIL vol. 12 (2021)

CYIL 12 (2021) COVID-19 RESTRICTIONS OF FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IN THE CR AND LITHUANIAs … With regard to the practice of administrative courts we may point at a crucial judgment of 23 April 2020, when the Municipal Court in Prague, 24 with effect of 27 April 2020, annulled various measures of the Ministry of Health, two of them dealing with restrictions of the free movement of persons. The Municipal Court found that the public authority had wrongly based its measures on the Public Health Act. According to the Municipal Court, after the declaration of emergency, the Ministry of Health shall no longer apply its powers under the Public Health Act, but it is upon the government to adopt extraordinary measures under the Crisis Act. During a state of emergency, the Crisis Act becomes lex specials in relation to the Public Health Act. The Municipal Court concluded that otherwise the difference between a normal and an emergency situation would disappear. The judgment of the Municipal Court was final. The Ministry of Health lodged a cassation with the Supreme Administrative Court, which, however, had no suspensive effect on the judgment. It was only on 26 February 2021 that the Supreme Administrative Court issued its judgment in this matter. 25 The Supreme Administrative Court disagreed with the contention of the Municipal Court that, during a state of emergency, the powers of the government under the Crisis Act prevail over the powers of the Ministry of Health under the Public Health Act. According to the Supreme Administrative Court, the emergency and crisis powers represent some kind of “superposition” in relation to the tasks for which the normal powers (under the Public Health Act) are not sufficient. Especially in times of crisis, when it is important for all authorities to carry out their tasks properly, in a timely and effective manner, it is undesirable for doubts or even conflicts of competence to arise. This interpretation will be important for future cases because the measures which were the subject to the review of the Municipal Court in April 2020 are no longer in force. 3.1 Legislative basis for the restrictions on the right of movement Regarding the legal possibilities to react to the present pandemic, besides the possibility to declare a state of emergency according to the Constitution of Lithuania (when a threat arises to the constitutional system or social peace in the state 26 ), the second venue of action, which is chosen presently to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic is to proclaim the extraordinary situation in the territory of Lithuania. The Law on Civil Protection outlines that an extraordinary event is a natural, technical, ecological, or social event that meets, reaches, or exceeds the established criteria and endangers the life or health of the population, their social conditions, property, and / or environment 27 . The event creates an extraordinary situation, which means “a situation resulting from an extraordinary event which may cause a sudden and serious danger to the life or health of the population, property, the environment or the death, injury of the population or cause other damage”. 28 Depending on the scale, the situation may be a municipal extraordinary situation or a state extraordinary situation. 3. Anti-epidemic measures in Lithuania

24 14 A41/2020. 25 6 As 114/2020-63.

26 The Constitution of Lithuania, Valstybės Žinios, 1992, Nr. 33-1014, 144 p. 27 Law on Civil Protection, Valstybės žinios, 1998-12-31, Nr. 115-3230. 28 Ibid., Article 2.

237