Health Minister Spahn’s powers for corona measures are criticized across all parties. The German Association of Judges also expresses concerns about the current special regulation. But the minister disagrees.
Federal Minister of Health Jens Spahn has defended the extension of corona-related special powers that he wanted, which are currently limited to March 2021.
“It is not somehow arbitrariness or coincidence that there are corresponding possibilities for the federal government, for the federal minister or for the states, but these are legal bases, bases decided by the Bundestag,” said Spahn in common Morning magazine from ARD and ZDF.
Extension of special rights planned
A draft law now states that the previous regulations should be “consolidated” “provided that this is necessary to protect the population from the risk of serious communicable diseases”.
When asked why the general conditions should not be set again by the Bundestag after the acute transitional situation, Spahn said: “They will continue to do so, as would be the case in our proposed Infection Protection Act for the Bundestag to lay down the rules.”
Spahn wants to regulate entry at the federal level
What Spahn, on the other hand, wants to standardize and put on a better legal basis are the regulations relating to entry. The issue of entry can only be regulated by the federal government and should not be handled differently by 16 federal states, said Spahn.
Across parties, there is currently criticism of the minor influence of parliaments on decisions about corona measures. For example, Bundestag Vice President Claudia Roth called for a stronger role for parliament in decisions in the fight against the corona pandemic. “Something went wrong,” said Roth in the Deutschlandfunk. The powers would have to be shifted back to parliament. The coalition factions had delegated to the prime ministers for far too long, which is now taking revenge.
Roth calls for joint debates
“At a time when it is a matter of making this difficult balance again and again, protecting health, but also protecting freedom and civil rights, there must be a struggle for solutions, debates, speeches, counter-arguments, alternatives, considerations, decisions and controls, “said Roth with conviction.
There is resentment not only among the opposition, but also in the coalition factions. “Parliament must be the place where the central decisions are made,” said CDU parliamentary group vice-chairman Thorsten Frei of the “Stuttgarter Zeitung”.
Criticism from the Left Party
The managing director of the German Association of Judges, Sven Rebehn, criticized the “Handelsblatt”: “In the first phase of the corona pandemic, it was justifiable to restrict rights of freedom through executive ordinances in order to be able to react as quickly as possible to acute dangers become permanent. “
The Left Party leader Katja Kipping also sees it this way: “An epidemiological emergency must not become a democratic emergency,” said Kipping after deliberations with the party leadership.
Spahn had always emphasized in the debate that he was not interested in preventing parliamentary debates. These are important because the measures to contain the current corona pandemic are about the “greatest restrictions on freedom” in the history of the Federal Republic as well as major “unreasonable demands on the individual”. In his opinion, the Bundestag could discuss the fight against the virus “more often”, added Spahn.