No abstract

The issue of the COVID-19 pandemic occupies the agenda of the whole world. The pivot of this pandemic is a crucial element that has become almost as important as the virus itself, namely the lockdown. Although, the rationale for lockdown is well-sustained by strong epidemiological arguments, exploring the ‘other’ unwanted consequences of the contemporary COVID-19 pandemic is mandatory for coagulating a robust agreed position against the numerous problems generated by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Starting from the rationale of the lockdown, in this paper we explored and exposed the other consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic measures such as the use or abuse of human rights and freedom restrictions, economic issues, marginalized groups and eclipse of all other diseases. Our scientific attempt is to coagulate a stable position and integrate current opposing views by advancing the idea that rather than applying the uniform lockdown policy, one could recommend instead an improved model targeting more strict and more prolonged lockdowns to vulnerable risk/age groups while enabling less stringent measures for the lower-risk groups, minimizing both economic losses and deaths. Rigorous (and also governed by freedom) debating may be able to synchronize the opposed perspectives between those advocating an extreme lockdown (e.g., most of the epidemiologists and health experts), and those criticizing all restrictive measures (e.g., economists and human rights experts). Confronting the multiple facets of the public health mitigation measures is the only way to avoid contributing to history with yet another failure, as seen in other past epidemics.

"The Covid-19 pandemic crisis serves as a genuine natural experiment for societies worldwide, as the health-related crisis allowed governments to implement extreme measures that impacted people’s rights and freedoms, challenging the boundaries of democracy and rule of law. In the context of religious life, Romania was pointed by the OSCE as being one of the countries that have opted for the harshest measures to restrict religious life since the beginning of the pandemic. In this paper we present a case study of Romania’s restrictions imposed on religious life during the Covid-19 crisis, using secondary data analysis stemming from the UN, the OSCE, the Court of Appeal of Bucharest etc., as a framework to objectively analyze how the government should act regarding religious life, by enforcing the principles enshrined by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Art. no. 18. Our main findings suggest that, in Romania, during the pandemic, the restrictions imposed on religious life were politically bargained by the government rather than being mediated through national law and international standards and commitments on Freedom of Religion or Belief and based on the democratic principles of the rule of law."