Swift decisions, swift, decisive action, uniform measures for the whole of Germany, the ability to plan during the crown crisis – these were probably the goals of Chancellor Angela Merkel when pushing the introduction of amendments to the Infection Protection Act. They had to regulate the introduction of an emergency brake under certain conditions. However, in practice, the bill has raised a lot of questions.
As you know, soon only a fairy tale tells itself. The decision was not taken urgently by the Bundestag. Some Länder prime ministers have announced plans that differ from those of the government. And the lawyers of the office are questioning the content of the planned changes. Meanwhile, the situation in Germany is getting worse. The incidence rate in Germany rose to 160.1. Resuscitation doctors are sounding the alarm.
The emergency brake, which Chancellor Angela Merkel planned to approve in the Bundestag today, April 15, caused heated debate. In all regions where the incidence rate per week exceeds 100 for three consecutive days, a curfew should be imposed, shops and cultural institutions should be closed, and mandatory testing is introduced in schools. Despite strong criticism from representatives of the SPD, some federal states and the opposition, as well as representatives of its own parliamentary faction, the federal government on Tuesday decided to amend the Law on Protection against Infections.
However, some lawyers and a number of experts from the office are skeptical about the bill. For example, lawyer Susanne Jaritz, who works in the Department of Health Policy, sent a message to the head of the Chancellery Helge Braun, which was signed by representatives of seven more departments, Bild reports. On March 9, Jarits announced that the bill is “problematic in some ways.” A former judge of the Hesse District Court highlighted several problematic points.
It is doubtful to introduce restrictions only on the basis of the incidence rate in the regions. It is necessary to introduce into the law the need to take into account other criteria, such as the R-score or the number of patients in intensive care units. The expert considers the automatic closure of schools and kindergartens to be “especially problematic”. And the “limitation of the number of allowed buyers” on the basis of “a certain number of square meters” in stores has already “been repeatedly canceled by the court.” In addition: the proportionality, as well as the currently “unproven effectiveness” of the curfew was declared illegal in court.
Bild turned to the office for comments on the criticism expressed by Jarits, however, did not receive an answer.
Germany says this:
Curfew to be imposed, but not as drastic as Merkel wanted
Federal Constitutional Court overturns ceiling rental rates for apartments
Experts have named the best toothpaste for children
If the tenant secretly registered tenants in a rented apartment