This article analyses the developments of the welfare state's reaction to the pandemic in Czechia, Hungary and Slovakia during 2020–2022, asking whether the changes in social policy represent only temporary responses to the challenges of the pandemic, or if the changes will likely lead to long‐run transformative changes in social policies. All three countries applied emergency adaptive changes to some extent except for job protection, as the short‐time work schemes represent a permanent change in Czechia and Slovakia. Furthermore, the absorption capacity of the welfare state was relatively good, which enabled the countries to avoid the negative social impacts of the crisis in terms of increased unemployment, poverty, and social exclusion. We argue the governments did not introduce permanent third‐order change because they already introduced such changes during the transition to the market economy in which they introduced a low‐expenditure welfare state trajectory. During the pandemic, this trajectory limited their fiscal space for introducing reforms that could radically expand the welfare state. Policy learning and political constellations also had some influence.

The Czech and Slovak system regarding the establishment of human rights institutions is different, although the countries constituted a common state for more than 80 years. While the Slovak behaviour on creating institutions is very fruitful (Slovakia established more than 5 human rights institutions), the Czech Republic has remained with a single one since 1999. Different approaches regarding this issue represent a very interesting area for research and the article defines the main reasons on opposing institutional behaviour of two previously connected countries. In such regard, the article attempted to answer the main research question on why such trend of human rights institutionalism occurred in countries of former Czechoslovakia through the lens of historical institutionalism. The analysis of critical junctures defined the situations why powerful actors decided to establish new institutions with a path dependent process. One party governmental systems - in Czech republic (1998-2002) and Slovakia (1992-1994, 2012-2016) established the most of the human rights institutions, while the period of Mikuláš Dzurinda’s second government in Slovakia (1998-2002) is the only period of multi-party coalition, when a human rights institution was created. The reasons of establishing human rights institutions remain dubious and without further explanations, and therefore the former political will can arrange the human rights institutional arrangement with its own perspective and simple reasoning. The article used as main methodological tool the content analysis of relevant documents (explanatory memorandums) and original transcripts of speeches of the Czech and Slovak Members of the National Council.