Health Crisis Measures and Standards for Fair Decision-Making: A Normative and Empirical-Based Account of the Interplay Between Science, Politics and Courts

This paper examines, in the light of COVID-19 crisis, room for judicial oversight health crisis measures based on public’s expectations how governments should act interplay with experts. The explains trust theory and procedural rationality review help to address concerns related legitimacy expertise. argues that courts distinguish between two stages. In initial stage, fear as a driver government support expertise justifies proportionality test is limited question whether were virologist expert advice. next people expect take expert-informed decisions, but also require takes into account societal needs. Procedural this stage demands examine decision was an informed balance rights interests.