Biological and social emergencies: legal and social aspects

The relevance of this problem is due to the fact that in most countries, legal regulation of emergencies (hereinafter referred to as ES) does not foresee scenarios for the global spread of infectious diseases that threaten public health. Typically, only natural and man-made emergencies are distinguished. An analysis of the current regulatory frameworks of Russia and Kazakhstan revealed the lack of a clear definition of biological and social emergencies in legislation, which has led to significant gaps in the regulation of relationships during a pandemic. In studying the psychological and social problems arising during a pandemic, general scientific methods of scientific inquiry, such as the logical method, analysis, and synthesis, were applied. Regulatory legal acts of Russia and Kazakhstan regulating social relations during a pandemic were analyzed using formal legal and comparative legal methods. The study revealed that the global pandemic has exposed shortcomings in the regulation of social relations at the legislative level, including restrictions on movement, self-isolation, suspension of communication services, unequal access to routine medical care and social government services for various categories of citizens (primarily paid PCR testing), and others. All of the above factors are related to social factors and have negatively impacted the emotional and psychological well-being of citizens in Russia and Kazakhstan, causing social tension in society. The authors of this study offer a number of recommendations for improving Russian and Kazakh legislation and legal education of the population, in particular: - a detailed classification of emergency situations, taking into account their causes and scale, must be established in the regulatory framework; - the state regulatory act declaring an emergency must specify that the management of the epidemic situation will be carried out by the Chief Sanitary Doctor or epidemiologist (if such a position is provided for in the state); - all restrictive measures must be reviewed by parliament or a court within 30 days of their introduction. Established restrictions may only be in effect for the period necessary to achieve the epidemiological objective and cannot be used for other purposes; - terminology in the legal regulation of emergency situations must also be standardized, taking into account international documents. The development of these proposals for mitigating social conflicts during the pandemic can reduce the destructive impact of adverse social tensions, the spread of coro-naphobia, false information, and psycho-emotional distress. The authors declare no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References