English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The first cases of the COVID-19 epidemic, registered in January 2020, and the first wave that followed, hit the world unprepared. The only means available to the various states were the various restrictive measures expected to alleviate the epidemic. In this article, the restrictive legal measures of two European countries, the EU member state Hungary and non-the EU member state Russia, are compared from the rule of law and law enforcement. The special legal order introduced in both countries and the measures taken within its framework have resulted in a significant restriction of fundamental rights. The epidemiological data of the two countries differed significantly, yet they tried very hard to defend themselves with similar means. There are two primary differences. Russia has used more robust control mechanisms to enforce similar measures, presumably due to the more difficult epidemic situation. The other difference is that Russia’s restrictions against Hungary did not cover freedom of expression and freedom of expression. As both the state of emergency and, with it, the more severe restrictions were lifted during the period under review. Following the reduction of the epidemic situation, both states remained within the legal framework.

State defense during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: the cases of the Russian Federation and Hungary