en:digital:unclassified:covid19_roc2

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
en:digital:unclassified:covid19_roc2 [2021/02/08 11:16]
no_name12
en:digital:unclassified:covid19_roc2 [2021/02/08 11:30] (current)
no_name12
Line 52: Line 52:
 Whether such an arrangement would have worked effectively is open to question. Nonetheless, this proposed amendment has been the only example, so far, of a member of the political opposition attempting to effectively challenge the government’s increasing authoritarianism. Had it passed, it would had introduced an active regulatory role for the parliament, allowing it to review, debate and amend existing and future decrees, introducing for the first time some level of scrutinization and accountability in the decision-making process surrounding the handling of the pandemic. The proposal was not allowed to proceed to a vote on grounds of urgency; and was instead sent by the parliament (with the support of AKEL) for review to the internal parliamentary committees in early December [18]. This was an obvious strategic move, condemning the amendment to remain in bureaucratic limbo, stack on a long pile of legislation awaiting a never-ending series of reviews and internal discussions, killing in this way the proposal without having to vote against it. This has not apparently stopped AKEL, as well as other parties, from hypocritically issuing statement after statement on the unconstitutionality, authoritarianism and politically repressive character of the decrees [19, 20, 21, 22], at the same time as they actively blocked the only meaningful attempt made to deprive the government from the power allowing it to rule the country by decree. Whether such an arrangement would have worked effectively is open to question. Nonetheless, this proposed amendment has been the only example, so far, of a member of the political opposition attempting to effectively challenge the government’s increasing authoritarianism. Had it passed, it would had introduced an active regulatory role for the parliament, allowing it to review, debate and amend existing and future decrees, introducing for the first time some level of scrutinization and accountability in the decision-making process surrounding the handling of the pandemic. The proposal was not allowed to proceed to a vote on grounds of urgency; and was instead sent by the parliament (with the support of AKEL) for review to the internal parliamentary committees in early December [18]. This was an obvious strategic move, condemning the amendment to remain in bureaucratic limbo, stack on a long pile of legislation awaiting a never-ending series of reviews and internal discussions, killing in this way the proposal without having to vote against it. This has not apparently stopped AKEL, as well as other parties, from hypocritically issuing statement after statement on the unconstitutionality, authoritarianism and politically repressive character of the decrees [19, 20, 21, 22], at the same time as they actively blocked the only meaningful attempt made to deprive the government from the power allowing it to rule the country by decree.
  
-Despite occasional public announcements against specific elements included in the ever-accumulating ministerial decrees, parliamentary oversight over the governmental handling of the pandemic has been essentially abandoned by the legislature, with the political opposition showing no interest in scrutinizing the executive or limiting the damage caused by the government’s authoritarian policies. What we are witnessing is nothing less than the ongoing disintegration of political rights at the hands of the executive, the slow erosion of the independent functioning of the judiciary; and the complete disregard of the legislature in keeping the government accountable over the exploitation, as well as the handling of the pandemic. Meanwhile, hospitals remain understaffed, concentration camps continue to be in place, checkpoints remain closed and workers remain largely unpaid and unsupported, under the oversight of a state that is increasingly resembling an authoritarian regime rather than a democratic republic. The institutions are of course there, but the democratic reflexes are not.+Despite occasional public announcements against specific elements included in the ever-accumulating ministerial decrees, parliamentary oversight over the governmental handling of the pandemic has been essentially abandoned by the legislature, with the political opposition showing no interest in scrutinizing the executive or limiting the damage caused by the government’s authoritarian policies. What we are witnessing is nothing less than the ongoing disintegration of political rights at the hands of the executive, the slow erosion of the independent functioning of the judiciary; and the complete disregard of the legislature in keeping the government accountable over the exploitation, as well as the handling of the pandemic. Meanwhile, hospitals remain understaffed, concentration camps continue to be in place, checkpoints remain closed and workers are left largely unpaid and unsupported, under the oversight of a state that is increasingly resembling an authoritarian regime rather than a democratic republic. The institutions are of course there, but the democratic reflexes are not.
  
 //Delirium// //Delirium//
en/digital/unclassified/covid19_roc2.1612782972.txt.gz · Last modified: 2021/02/08 11:16 by no_name12