| Chamber |
Chamber name |
IPU Parline (https://data.ipu.org/compare?field=country%3A%3Afield_political_system#map) |
Chamber of Deputies, Senate |
National Council, Federal Council |
House of Representatives, Senate |
Chamber of Deputies, Federal Senate |
House of Commons, Senate |
Chamber of Deputies, Senate |
National People's Congress |
Legislative Assembly |
House of Peoples' Representatives, House of the Federation |
Parliament |
National Assembly, Senate |
German Bundestag, Federal Council |
|
House of Representatives |
House of Representatives, Senate |
Parliament |
Chamber of Deputies, Senate |
House of Representatives, Senate |
Parliament |
National Assembly |
Chamber of Deputies, Senate |
House of Representatives, Senate |
House of Representatives |
Parliament |
National Assembly, Senate |
Assembly of the Republic |
Chamber of Deputies, Senate |
State Duma, Council of the Federation |
National Assembly |
Parliament |
National Assembly, National Council of Provinces |
National Assembly |
Congress of Deputies, Senate |
Parliament |
|
House of Representatives, Senate |
Grand National Assembly of Türkiye |
House of Commons, House of Lords |
House of Representatives, Senate |
House of Representatives, Senate |
National Assembly of the People's Power |
Parliament |
National Assembly |
House of Representatives, Senate |
Congress of the Republic |
Parliament |
|
Assembly of People's Representatives |
National Assembly |
| Political system |
Presidential\nParliamentary\nPresidential-Parliamentary\nCommunist |
IPU Parline (https://data.ipu.org/compare?field=country%3A%3Afield_political_system#map |
Presidential system |
Presidential-Parliamentary |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential system |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential system |
Communist system |
Presidential system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential-Parliamentary |
Parliamentary system |
|
Presidential system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential-Parliamentary |
Presidential system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential-Parliamentary |
Presidential-Parliamentary |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential-Parliamentary |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential-Parliamentary |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential-Parliamentary |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential system |
Presidential system |
Communist system |
Presidential system |
Parliamentary system |
Parliamentary system |
Presidential system |
Presidential-Parliamentary |
|
Presidential-Parliamentary |
Presidential system |
| Structure of parliament |
Unicameral\nBicameral |
IPU Parline (https://data.ipu.org/compare?field=country%3A%3Afield_structure_of_parliament#map |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
|
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
|
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Unicameral |
Unicameral |
Bicameral |
Unicameral |
Unicameral |
|
Unicameral |
Unicameral |
| Electoral system |
Proportional representation\nPlurality/majority\nMixed system\nOther systems\nNot applicable |
IPU Parline
(https://data.ipu.org/compare?field=chamber%3A%3Afield_electoral_system&structure=any__lower_chamber#map)
|
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
Plurality/majority |
Proportional representation |
Not applicable |
Proportional representation |
Plurality/majority |
Proportional representation |
Plurality/majority |
Mixed system |
|
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
Mixed system |
Plurality/majority |
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
Mixed system |
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
Plurality/majority |
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
Mixed system |
Proportional representation |
Plurality/majority |
Proportional representation |
Plurality/majority |
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
|
Mixed system |
Proportional representation |
Plurality/majority |
Plurality/majority |
Proportional representation |
Other systems |
Plurality/majority |
Mixed system |
Plurality/majority |
Proportional representation |
Proportional representation |
|
Plurality/majority |
Mixed system |
| Government type (March 2020) |
Government type (as of 11 March 2020) \nParliamentary system: single-party or coalition
\nPresidential/semi-presidential system: divided, unified |
ParlGov (see https://www.parlgov.org/data/parlgov-development_csv-utf-8/view_cabinet.csv) and other
sources
|
Divided |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Divided |
Single party |
Divided |
Single party |
Divided |
Single party |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Unified |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Single party |
Coalition |
Unified |
Unified |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Single party |
Single party |
Single party |
Coalition |
Single party |
Single party |
Unified |
Coalition |
Coalition |
Unified |
Coalition |
Unified |
Single party |
Divided |
Unified |
Unified |
|
Coalition |
|
Divided |
Unified |
|
Divided |
Unified |
| Parliamentary basis (March 2020) |
(as of 11 March 2020) \nMajority \nMinority \nNA - Presidential systems |
ParlGov (https://www.parlgov.org/data/parlgov-development_csv-utf-8/view_cabinet.csv) and other
sources |
|
Majority |
Minority |
|
Minority |
|
Majority |
|
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
|
Minority |
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
Minority |
|
|
Majority |
Minority |
Minority |
Majority |
Minority |
Minority |
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
|
Minority |
Minority |
Majority |
Majority |
Minority |
Majority |
|
|
|
|
Majority |
|
|
Majority |
|
Minority |
|
| National pandemic election |
Has a national/federal-level election been held in the country between 15 February 2020 and 31 December 2022?
|
International IDEA (https://www.idea.int/data-tools) and other sources |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
NA. |
No |
Yes |
| National pandemic election date |
Day the election was held |
International IDEA (https://www.idea.int/data-tools) and other sources |
14/11/2021 |
|
|
30/10/2022 |
09/11/2021 |
21/11/2021 |
|
04/03/2022 |
21/06/2021 |
|
24/04/2022 |
26/09/2021 |
19/12/2021 |
|
|
23/03/2021 |
25/09/2022 |
09/03/2020 |
10/01/2022 |
15/05/2022 |
06/06/2021 |
15/03/2021 |
17/10/2020 |
13/09/2021 |
|
24/01/2021 |
12/06/2020 |
17/09/2021 |
04/03/2022 |
07/10/2020 |
|
03/09/2022 |
|
09/11/2022 |
|
|
|
|
11/03/2020 |
19/06/2022 |
|
12/07/2020 |
04/03/2022 |
NA. |
06/06/2021 |
NA. |
NA. |
NA. |
12/06/2020 |
| Post-election government type |
Government type (post elections held since 11 March 2020) \nParliamentary system: single-party or coalition
\nPresidential/semi-presidential system: Divided, unified |
ParlGov (https://www.parlgov.org/data/parlgov-development_csv-utf-8/view_cabinet.csv) and other
sources |
Divided |
|
|
Divided |
Single party |
Divided |
|
Divided |
Single party |
|
coalition |
coalition |
coalition |
|
|
coalition |
coalition |
Single party |
coalition |
coalition |
Unified |
Coalition |
Single party |
Coalition |
|
|
Coalition |
Single party |
Coalition |
Single party |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Divided |
|
|
|
Coalition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Post-election parliamentary basis |
Parliamentary basis (post elections held since 11 March 2020) \nMajority \nMinority \nNA - Presidential
systems |
ParlGov (https://www.parlgov.org/data/parlgov-development_csv-utf-8/view_cabinet.csv) and other
sources |
Minority |
|
|
|
Minority |
|
|
|
Majority |
|
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
|
|
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
Minority |
Minority |
|
Majority |
Majority |
Minority |
|
|
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
Majority |
|
|
|
Minority |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority |
Majority |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Government change |
Did the election held from 21 Feb 2020 to 21 Feb 2022 result in a change of government type or change in the
majority or minority basis of the government? |
ParlGov (https://www.parlgov.org/data/parlgov-development_csv-utf-8/view_cabinet.csv) and other
sources |
|
|
|
Yes |
No |
Yes |
|
Yes |
No |
|
No |
No |
No |
|
|
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
|
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
|
Yes |
|
Yes |
|
|
|
|
No |
Yes |
|
No |
No |
|
Yes |
|
|
|
No |
| Party change |
Did the election held from 21 Feb 2020 to 21 Feb 2022 result in a change in parties that are in the
government? |
ParlGov (https://www.parlgov.org/data/parlgov-development_csv-utf-8/view_cabinet.csv) and other
sources |
Yes |
|
|
Yes |
No |
Yes |
|
Yes |
No |
|
No |
Yes |
No |
|
|
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
|
Yes |
|
Yes |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
Yes |
|
No |
No |
|
Yes |
|
|
|
No |
| Incumbent change |
Did the election held from 21 Feb 2020 to 21 Feb 2022 result in a change of incumbents? |
ParlGov (https://www.parlgov.org/data/parlgov-development_csv-utf-8/view_cabinet.csv) and other
sources |
|
|
|
Yes |
No |
Yes |
|
Yes |
No |
|
No |
Yes |
No |
|
|
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
No |
No |
Yes |
|
No |
Yes |
|
No |
No |
|
Yes |
|
Yes |
|
|
|
|
Yes |
Yes |
|
No |
No |
|
Yes |
|
|
|
|
| System/government notes |
Any additional information on thes ystem or government type, including notes on changes resulting from
elections held since 21 Feb 2020. |
Various sources |
Frente de Todos [a coalition of Peronist parties generally supportive of the President] have a majority in the
Senate but not [quite] in the Chamber of Deputies. The 2021 Legislative elections saw the largest coalition in
both the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate change from the Everyone’s Front to Together for Change. The
coalition did not hold a majority of seats in both chambers though. |
- |
- |
Change in governments in a very polarised and tight election. Far-right president Bolsonaro lost to former
president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. No party holds majority of seats. |
The 2021 election saw remarkably similar results to the 2019 election and no change in the composition of the
government. |
The 2021 election saw a change in President from the Independent Sebastián Piñera to Gabriel Boric (Social
Convergence in the Alliance of Apruebo Dignidad). There was significant churn of legislative seats between
political coalitions. But no single party holds a majority of seats so the government type remains divided. |
One-party state |
Presidents are allowed to serve for a single-term only. The new president - rodrigo Chaves - comes to power
with a weak mandate |
Merger of parties in 2019 gave the governing party a super majority. The Prosperity Party (effectively a
rebranding of the previous governing EPRDF) retained their super majority in the House of Peoples'
Representatives. |
Over sixed coalition containing 6 parties. |
Emmanuel Macron defeated Marine Le Pen and was re-elected as President of France. |
The 2021 elections saw the CDU-SPD-CSU coalition replaced by a coalition between SPD-Greens-FDP. |
The Legislative Council of Hong Kong is almost entirely pro-Beijing in its composition. The Parliament
operates within a Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China. The 2021 election saw no
change in either the composition or the pro-Beijing control of the Legislative Council. |
The President is affiliated to the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle which is the largest party in a 7
party oversized (supermajority) coalition in the People's Representative Council. |
Elections held on 8/2/2020 (before the Covid-19 pandemic), but which took until 27/6/2020 to form a
government. Leo Veradkar headed a minoirty coalition of the Fine Gael and independents until 27/6/2020. After
this was a majoirty coalition made up of Fianna Fail-Fine Gael-Green and headed by Michael Martin |
Political crisis with a caretaker government seeking to circumvent parliament [with the help of the speaker]
in 2020. The 2021 election saw the removal of Likud, the senior coalition partner and party of former PM
Benjamin Netanyahu, from the coalition government. A new 8 party coalition was formed following the 2021
election headed by Naftali Bennett (Yamina alliance). |
The results of the general election showed the centre-right coalition led by Giorgia Meloni's Brothers of
Italy, a radical-right political party, winning an absolute majority of seats in the Italian Parliament. |
The 2020 election saw the Jamaica Labour Party increase its parliamentary majority (from 32 of the 63 seats
before the election to 49 after) over the People's National Party. |
Minority coalition consisting of 9 parties in a support agreement with 6 parties. The New Unity party of
incumbent prime minister Krišjānis Kariņš received the highest percentage of the vote (19%) and won the most
seats (26). |
President belongs to the Free Patriotic Movement, which is the second largest party in the governing
coalition. |
The President’s MORENA Party is a member of the Juntos Haremos Historia coalition. The coalition held a
majority of seats in both the Senate and Chamber of Deputies before and after the 2021 election. |
The election saw no change in the composition of the exiting coalition. The government continued until 10
January 2022 when a continuation cabinet containing the same parties was formed. |
New Zealand had a minority government prior to the 2020 election comprised of the Labour Party and New Zealand
First with a confidence and supply agreement with the Greens. The 2020 election saw large gains for the Labour
Party, winning 65 of the 120 seats, and forming a single party majority government alongside a cooperation
agreement (falling short of a coalition) with the Greens. |
The right-wing majoirty coalition collapsed in January 2020 when the Progress Party left coalition over
repatriation of former ISIS member. This meant a minoirty coalition went into the pandemic. In the 2021
election, seat losses by the Conservatives and gains by the Centre Party allowed for the formation of a
centre-left minority coalition government conatining the Labour Party and Centre Party to be formed after the
election. |
- |
The incumbent President, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, was reelected for a second term. |
A political crisis has gone hand in hand with the pandemic. The government was formed on 14/3/2020 but was
dismissed after a vote of no confidence in December 2020. The 2020 legislative elections saw the Prime
Minister's Social Democratic Party lose seats and three parties (the Liberal Party, USR Plus and UDMR) form a
coalition that holds a majority of seats in both the Senate and Chamber of Deputies. |
The 2021 election saw United Russia retain their large majority in the State Duma. |
Vučić won 60 percent of the votes in the first round of the presidential election, while Zdravko Ponoš, the
candidate of the United for the Victory of Serbia coalition, placed second. The coalition around SNS lost its
majority in the National Assembly, although 12 ballot lists crossed the threshold and entered the National
Assembly. |
The 2020 election saw no change in the super majority held by the governing PAP. |
- |
Opposition candidate Yoon Suk-yeol of the People Power Party won the election, defeating candidate Lee
Jae-myung of the incumbent Democratic Party. |
- |
Government parties lost their majority, Moderate Party leader Ulf Kristersson was elected Prime Minister on 17
October. |
The President belongs to the DPP, the senior coalition partner in the majoirty government. |
- |
- |
- |
The Presidential election in 2020 saw the Republican incumbent Donald Trump defeated by Democrat Joe Biden.
The Democrats held their slim majoirty in the House of Representatives but were unable to secure a majority in
the Senate. |
Gustavo Petro was elected on a runoff election. |
- |
Incumbent President Nana Akufo-Addo of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) was re-elected in the first round after
securing a majority of the votes. |
Incumbent prime minister Viktor Orbán reelected. |
- |
Pedro Castillo was elected president. |
- |
- |
- |
Highly contested election |
| Parliament suspension |
Has parliament been suspended or postponed?\nYes\nNo |
LAC19 country report |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
| Parliament closure notes |
Notes on parliamentary closure |
LAC19 country report |
Closed from beginning of the stay at home order on 19/3/2020 to the 13/5/2020 when hybrid session began |
No closure |
No closure |
Congress was never closed, though it didn't meet during the period of pandemic disruption |
Parliament adjourned and all scheduled sittings cancelled between 13/3/2020 and 18/7/2020. Recalled on 17
occassions during this time. Met on 20/7, 22/7 and 12/8 before then being prorogued until 23/9/2020 (20 days
sitting). The General Election in 2021 saw the Liberal Party increase their seat share from 155 to 160. But this
remained 10 seats short of a majority in the House of Commons. |
No suspension of Congress. Rapidly passed a law to allow remote operation |
Tha annual meeting of the National People’s Congress is in March each year and the annual meeting was
postponed, with a shortened session convened from 22/5/2020 to 28/5/2020 |
Parliament was closed very briefly and moved to a nearby museum to allow for social distance measures. Dates
are not certain though. |
No suspension of parliament. Only moved to a new building to allow for social disancing |
No suspension |
Recess between 9/3/2020 and 22/3/2020 |
No suspension |
No Legislative Council meetings were held between 18 July 2020 and 13 October 2020 inclusive, although a good
part of this fell across pre-planned recesses. This was with the exception of meetings of the Special House
Committee meeting, two special meetings of the Legislative Council Commission, a special meeting of the Panel on
Welfare Services, a meeting of the House Committee, and a small number of meetings of the Finance Committee |
Never closed during the pandemic |
Deemed remote proceedings would contravene the constitution |
Inoperative between 2/3/2020 and 26/3/2020 while government formation was still in process. But attempts at
closing Patliament in the name of Covid-19 were unsuccessful |
Not entirely suspended |
No suspension |
Following the declaration of the emergency situation the Saeima decided to announce a break in the regular
session and moved to emergency mode |
Parliament suspended by the Secretariat of the Parliament |
Congress suspended on 20/3/2020 through to 30/4/2020 when the ordinary period was ended prematurely |
No suspension of the lower house |
Suspended between 25/3/2020 and 28/4/2020. This period included 2 weeks adjournement normally coiunciding with
school holidays |
|
Parliament prorogued on 13/3/2020 until 11/5/2020 |
No suspension |
No suspension of parliament |
No suspension |
Suspended for six weeks after the declaration of a state of emeregency on 3/3/2020. Resumed on 29/4/2020. Then
parliament was dissolved on 3/6/2020 for elections held on 21/6/2020 |
Continued to sit throughout the pandemic |
Suspended from 23/3/2020 to 13/4/2020 |
No overarching suspension |
Suspension of 15 days on 12/3/2020 when first cases amongst MPs were recorded. This suspension did not include
the appearance of the Minister of Health before the Congress’ Committee for Health and for plenary sessions
devoted to validation of royal decree-laws and extensions of the state of alarm. On 21/4/2020 sessions resumed
with some deadlines suspended. |
Parliament has continued to work as normal throughout the pandemic and has not resorted to virtual meetings
|
No suspension |
No suspension |
Parliament was suspended, though Covid-19 was not cited as the reason for the closure. These closures are not
out of the ordinary (the last being in 2019) |
Suspended between 25/3/2020 and 21/4.2020. Easter recess extended by 7-14 days. |
Congress continued to meet in person throughout the pandemic |
Congress were generally suspended for almost one month (16 March–13 April) due to (i) Resolution 385/2020 of
the MHSP |
Light interruption with rescheduled National Assembly meetings. n 2020, the pandemic affected the work of the
legislative body. By constitutional mandate, the National Assembly must hold two ordinary sessions per year,
traditionally in July and December. However, since there is no legal obligation for meeting during these months,
ordinary sessions were held in October and December. |
- |
The Parliament has not ceased its sessions during the pandemic; thus, there was no need to resort to virtual
meetings. |
The session of the Dewan Rakyat which was originally scheduled for 9 March 2020 was postponed to 18 May 2020,
amidst the political turmoil that led to a change of government. Then, on 18 May 2020, Parliament only convened
a half-day session in order to comply with the formal constitutional requirement that there shall not be a gap
of six months or more between the last sitting in one session and the first meeting in the next session |
The National Parliament has continued to operate without any limitation, although via virtual sessions or
meetings, since face-to-face activities in closed spaces represent a serious risk of contagion |
President dissolved the parliament on 02 March 2020. No sitting in parliament functioned between 02 March 2020
and 05 August 2020 |
The European Parliament’s business was significantly disrupted in spring 2020. A plenary session took place in
late March 2020, but with only one debate, three voting sessions, and 11 votes. By October 2020, it was possible
for the plenary sitting to include 18 debates, |
- |
- |
| Date parliament closed |
Date variable indicating the first day Parliament was closed due to Covid-19 |
LAC19 country report |
13/09/2020 |
|
|
|
13/03/2020 |
|
05/03/2020 |
early-March |
|
|
09/03/2020 |
|
18/07/2020 |
|
|
|
|
|
13/03/2020 |
12/03/2020 |
20/03/2020 |
|
25/03/2020 |
|
13/03/2020 |
|
|
|
03/03/2020 |
|
23/03/2020 |
|
12/03/2020 |
|
|
|
05/05/2020 |
25/03/2020 |
|
16/03/2020 |
|
|
NA. |
03/09/2020 |
NA. |
03/02/2020 |
NA. |
NA. |
NA. |
| Date parliament reopened |
Date variable indicating the day Parliament reopened due to Covid-19 |
LAC19 country report |
13/05/2020 |
|
|
|
18/07/2020 |
|
22/05/2020 |
early-March |
|
|
22/03/2020 |
|
13/10/2020 |
|
|
|
|
|
09/04/2020 |
21/04/2020 |
30/04/2020 |
|
28/04/2020 |
|
11/05/2020 |
|
|
|
29/04/2020 |
|
13/04/2020 |
|
27/03/2020 |
|
|
|
01/10/2020 |
21/04/2020 |
|
13/04/2020 |
|
|
NA. |
18/5/2020 |
NA. |
08/08/2020 |
NA. |
NA. |
NA. |
| Parliament reduced |
Has the operation of Parliament been reduced in any way in response to Covid-19? |
LAC19 country report |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
| Parliament reduction notes |
Notes on parliament reduction |
LAC19 country report |
No reduction |
In spring 2020, following an agreement by the speakers of the different parties, the numbers of MPs present in
the National Council during parliamentary sessions was reduced proportionally—only to an extent that all
constitutional requirements on quora were met |
Plenary meetings have been held in a hybrid format, with only two members of each political group. Select
committees met either by video conference or in a hybrid format. MPs not physically present able to vote
electronically from the date of 26 March 2020. Some plenary meeting was held in the European Parliament in
Brussels, a location where social distancing between MPs could be respected. |
The Congress was never closed, but debating and voting procedures have been virtual for six months. The two
Houses—the Senate and Chamber of Deputies—and their respective committees were able to maintain their agenda
with virtual meetings, which involves the passage of legislation and parliamentary committee meetings. There
were no abnormal constraints on the process of voting, on the number of persons permitted to participate in
plenary debates, or on the process for posing questions and offering rejoinders to answers. |
When adjourned used the 'unanimous consent' procedure to fast track the adoption of Covid-19 legislation. The
process limits the opportunity for debate. In July and August questioning of ministers on Covid-19 related
matters was limited to 95 mins and Covid-19 related debates limited to 2 hrs 20 mins |
No reduction |
Standing committeees unable to conduct usual meetings. Move to partial sessions online |
Legislature moved to a nearby museum and plenary sessions held in a socially distanced manner. Political party
caucus meetings were moved online. |
No reduction |
Only neccessary and urgent issues discussed in Parliament from the 24 March 2020. Committee chairs along with
government ministers ruled on what was neccessary and urgent. These restrictions were renewed twice for March
and April 2021. In March 2020, parliamentary groups decided to restrict the number of MPs in plenary sessions. A
maximum of 54 MPs (out of 200) were allowed to take part in the plenary sessions; the places were distributed
according to the proportion of the seats of each party. It was also decided that incidental majorities, eg due
to quarantine of MPs, would not be allowed in parliamentary voting so as not to slow down the normal legislative
proceedings. From 9 September 2020 onwards, the maximum number of MPs in plenary sessions was raised to 74. The
necessity of this restriction was to be reviewed at the end of September 2021. |
Access to parliamentary estate restricted from 22/3/2020. Initially 3 members per political group, increased
to 75 (of 577 total) from 27/4/2020, 151 from 27/5/2020 and all deputies after 22/6/2020. Initially 18 Senators
allowed access from 24/3/2020. Then slowly increased to 189 (half the chamber) by 22/6/2020. Party Presidents
authorised to cast votes on behalf of their party representatives. During this period, both chambers decided to
focus their work on emergency legislation linked to the Covid-19 crisis, especially the statutes related to the
state of health emergency, and financial statutes. |
At the beginning of the pandemic, parliamentary groups reduced the number of present representatives by a
pairing agreement in order to keep physical distance. Rules of Proceedings amended to lower the quorum
requirement (quarter of members rather than half). In committees, members could attend meetings and vote through
electronic means of communication. However, electronic meetings and voting have not been introduced for plenary
sessions. |
Prior to the closure, plenary and committee sessions were reduced or cancelled |
No reduction |
Reduced attendance from 19/3/2020 with 30% capacity, with members sitting proportionally in relation to the
proportion of seats held by their party. No ordinary committees sat between January and October 2020. |
A limit was placed on the numbers attending plenary sessions for a brief period. Physical attendance was also
limited in committees, though virtual proceedings meant operations were not limited. |
Significant disruption and limitations to proceedings. Plenary sessions reduced between March and mid-June
when both chambers met only a couple of times per week. The calendar was modified to give priority to urgent
bills and transposing statutiry decrees into statute. Number of members allowed to participate in plenary
reduced. Following a “gentlemen’s agreement”, groups decided to limit the attendance to 55% of the total members
of each House (350 deputies and 161 senators). Nonetheless, despite the said agreement, the attendance was often
much higher. For example, 412 deputies were present at the plenary that took place on 14 April 2020, and 246
senators participated at the plenary of 9 April 2020 [para 39]. However, the quorum not being reached in a
plenary taking place on 6/10/2020 |
No reduction |
Parliament used extraordinary sittings, but only the modt pressing issues were raised. |
No reduction |
Smaller groups (e.g. task force for Covid-19) have been able to meet physically. Only full hybrid sessions
from September 2020 onwards |
Rules limiting how members can interrupt one another and also requiring social distancing in the chamber |
The business of the House was mainly focused on the budget and pandemic-related legislation, along with
scrutiny of the executive’s emergency response. Quroum threshold of 75% removed entirely so that business could
be conducted with only one-quarter of MPs present in person |
In May 2020 it was recommended that only the quorum requirement (as outlined under article 73 of the
Constitution) of members attend parliament (87 of 169 members). Committees’ activities were limited for about a
month after the public health measures of 12 March 2020. |
No reduction |
Plenary meetings only held once per week and with only one-fifth of members present. Plenary deliberations
have taken place with a quorum of at least 50% of members. Committees only met when the topic was deemed
essential. |
Fully hybrid plenary and commissions. Online proceedings [not discussed in the report - information collected
from InterPARES/IDEA] |
Number of plenary sessions was reduced as was the length of deliberation. Political meetings (workshops,
roundtables, tec) were cancelled or moved online. |
MPs unable to participate in oral questions, urgent questions, and ministerial statements. Committees unable
to meet |
No reduction |
Fully virtual or hybrid throughout. Limited access for members to committees and for a (such as meetings of
the Presiding Officers; forums of party chief whips in the National Assembly, National Council of Provinces and
provincial legislatures; and the Speakers’ Forum) |
Times when committees or seminars have been cancelled due to positive cases |
Appearances of the Minister of Health before parliamentary Committees continued even during the suspensions.
Plenary sessions continued in person, of up to 50% of the size of their respective groups (half capactity in
parliament). Hybrid proceeding were made available after the intitial suspension. |
Informal agreement to limit to 55 the number of members participating in plenary sessions and votes. Each
party group can choose who represents them in debates and votes |
No reduction |
Meetings held on a basis of neccesity. Numbers of parliamentary staff in and around parliament were limited.
Meetings were required to end before 11pm |
No reduction |
End of remote procceding coincided with recuced numbers in the chamber to mean that parliamentary proceedings
were reduced.Nothing formal, but members of both Houses able to use 'pairing' and a pilot scheme for proxy
voting used for parental absence since 2019 was extended to include MPs unable to attend due to medical and
public health reasons from 10/6/2020 to the end of remote participation |
No reduction |
|
|
|
NA. |
|
NA. |
|
|
|
|
| Reduction of parliamentary debate |
Has access to Parliamentary debate been reduced, either in terms of the physical presence of members or a
reduction of normal operations, as a response to Covid-19? |
LAC19 country report |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
|
No |
|
No |
Yes |
|
No |
Yes |
| Reduction of committees |
Have committee proceedings been reduced, either in terms of the physical presence of members or a reductionof
normal operations, as a response to Covid-19? |
LAC19 country report |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
No |
|
No |
Yes |
|
No |
No |
| Virtual/hybrid in chamber |
Were debate proceedings conducted in either a virtual or hyrbrid format during the pandemic? |
LAC19 country report |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
No |
|
Yes |
No |
|
Yes |
Yes |
| Virtual/hybrid in committee |
Were committee proceedings conducted in either a virtual or hyrbrid format during the pandemic? |
LAC19 country report |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
No |
|
Yes |
No |
|
Yes |
Yes |
| Virtual/hybrid notes |
Notes on virtual/hybrid in chamber/committee |
LAC19 country report |
Full hybrid or remote proceedings in both the plenary and committees |
No hybrid alternative introduced in Parliament. |
Adopted hybrid proceedings in plenary sessions, with only two members of each party faction physically present
in the chamber and the rest via video link. Some Select Committees have been held in a hybrid/virtual format
[para 36] |
Entirely remote proceedings for both plenary sessions and committees |
Members could participate in debates in person or by video conference. Committees meetings 'occurred online
for the most part' |
Hybrid proceedings in both plenary sessions and committee procedures |
Committees met, at least partically, online |
In mid-July 2020, parliamentary rules were modified to permit virtual sessions of the Legislative Assembly
that allowed synchronous deliberation and public participation. |
|
Regarding parliamentary work otherwise, the Speaker’s Council of the Parliament outlined on 24 March 2020 that
MPs could work from home and follow matters digitally. |
Both chambers adopted hybrid procedures in committees but not for plenary sessions |
Electronic meetings and voting for committee procedures but not plenary sessions. This largely resulted from
the conclusion that introducing hybrid plenary proceedings would require a constitutional amendment |
No hybrid proceedings were put inplace |
Hybrid sessions and home working were used to prevent closure or reduction of parliament |
Social distanced and reduced numbers, but no hybrid proceedings |
Plenary sessions were never held in a virtual format. But committee procedures relied on hybrid formats to
continue their oversight |
No remote plenary sessions. But committees were given permission to hold non-deliberative and informal
proceedings online |
No hybrid plenary sessions [just social distancing] but some committees have met virtually |
Committees meetings were organized in various hybrid formats such as fully online, partially online or in some
cases in person. MPs working in the Plenary Chamber in eight separate parliamentary premises were provided with
conference equipment. |
30.\tThere has been an attempt to introduce electronic means to enable the parliamentary committees to meet
remotely and to conduct their business without significant alterations. However, this initiative was not adopted
despite the extremely exceptional circumstances. |
Hybrid proceedings in both the plenary and committees |
Many parliamentary meetings, both in plenary session as well as committee meetings, have been held digitally,
either fully or in a hybrid form |
Hybrid meeting of committees |
Adopted hybrid procedures in committees but not for plenary sessions |
|
|
Hybrid plenary and commmittees [data from InterPARES/IDEA] |
Hybrid or virtual meetings of committees and other meetings |
No video of hybrid procedures |
Passed reform to allow meetings in different rooms |
Virtual plenary and committee sessions |
An amendment was passed to allow virtual proceedings to be conducted, but none have been held in practice |
Hybrid proceedings were allowed. But full virtual plenary sessions were rejected for constitutional reasons
|
Possible for members of committees to particpate virtually |
No need for virtual/hybrid operation |
|
No hybrid or virtual proceedings when parliament was open |
Hybrid participation in House of Commons oral question, urgent questions and ministerial statement sessions.
Ended on 2/6/2020. Some proceedings were accessible for MPs who self-certified as unable to attend due to
medical or public health reasons [but no voting]. In House of Lords, provisions have been made for hybrid
proceedings [and voting] and committees from 21/4/2020 onwards |
No hybrid proceedings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Alternative voting |
Were alternative methods of voting adopted in either the chamber or in committees during the pandemic? |
LAC19 country report |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No data |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Alternative voting notes |
Notes on alternative voting |
LAC19 country report |
Electronic voting set up |
None |
Voting and quorum rules amended on 26/3/2020 to allow MPs not present to vote electronically |
Full remote voting |
Adopted in March 2021 as detailed here -
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/a-historic-first-mps-hold-house-of-commons-votes-by-app-1.5338151
|
Fully remote system of voting |
? |
Each deputy was provided with the necessary communications equipment and during sessions had to remain visible
on camera and be available and attentive or they would be recorded as absent. Voting tallies were registered
using digital technology. In the event of technological failure, voice votes would be recorded alongside the
name of the corresponding deputy |
None |
Digital voting only permitted in committees |
From 17 March 2020 the presidents of political parties were authorized to submit the votes of their party’s
MPs |
None [see V4 details for constitutional barriers] |
None |
None |
All votes conducted in a socially distanced but in-person way |
Continued as in person roll call [according to InterPARES/IDEA] |
To vote, members must be present in the chamber. With in person votes being conducted via staggered roll cals
|
None |
e-Saeima platform ensured the most important functions of parliamentary sittings, namely, the opportunity to
debate and vote on items included in the plenary agenda |
No electronic means of voting was introduced |
Electronic voting |
Electronic voting |
Party whips often cast votes and presence threshold reduced, so no voting arrangements made |
No provisions for alternative voting made. Led to a problem in May 2020 when the Christian Democrats forced a
full plenary [see Jeff's main document for more details] |
None |
None |
Remote voting used [[data from InterPARES/IDEA] |
None |
No voting procedures after powers placed in the hands of the exectuive |
None |
Remote voting during virtual plenary sessions required members to communicate their intended votes to party
whips who then communicated those votes to the Speaker |
None |
Telematic voting procedures were put in place |
Number from each party group limited in votes. Parties get to choose who represents them in the votes |
No requirements |
None |
None |
Used up until 2/6/2020 when ended unilaterally by the government |
Proxy voting in the House of Representatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Specific Covid-19 oversight committee |
Was a committee formed just for oversight of Covid-19 measures? |
LAC19 country report |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Existing committees for Covid-19 oversight |
Was an existing committee, or committees, used toscrutinise Covid-19 legislation? |
LAC19 country report |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Committee oversight notes |
Notes on committee oversight |
LAC19 country report |
Bicameral Committee to overseee DNUs (decrees of necessity and urgency). Committee chaired by a member of the
President's ruling coalition (Frento de Todos)
https://www.diputados.gov.ar/prensa/noticias/noticias-podio/noticias_1268.html
|
Main Committee of the National Council . Chaired by Wolfgang Sobotka who is a member of the Prime Minister's
party
https://de-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Hauptausschuss_des_Nationalrates?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui,sc
|
No such committee established at the national level. Some evidence form the country report that such bodies
have been set up at the sub-national level. |
Nothing at the federal level. Some evidence from the country report that oversight was stronger at the
sub-national level. |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses. Parliament very much sidelined at the federal
level.The federal government also semmed to be able to curtail regional parliaments as well. |
Five Special Investigative Commissions formed to oversee different policy areas related to Covid (e.g. (a)
government measures to mitigate the effects of the pandemic, and government measures during the pandemic in
relation to public health, the economy, and public order (joint commissions 47 and 48);10 (b) government
measures that may have entailed an artificial reduction in death record reports (commission 50);11 (c)
government measures in relation to the rise in electricity prices during the pandemic (commission 51);12 and (d)
government measures in relation to quarantine facilities (commission 53).) Commission 47 and 48 chaired by
opposition. |
Standing Committee receives an annual report by the legislative affairs committee for information and
approval. |
The Legislative Commission on income and public spending has oversight over public disbursement, and began an
investigation into problems with the purchase of emergency Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and the extent to
which the CCSS procurement procedures were followed. |
State of Emergency Inquiry Board (SEIB) whenever it approves a state of emergency that the executive declares.
The country report suggest that the committee was sympathetic to the government. Peteros Woldesemayat chaired
the committee though his party affiliation has not been confirmed. |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses. Parliament as a whole, rather than committees,
plays a significant role. |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses. No specific committee. The execuitve was adept at
limiting the oversight powers of parliament. |
The Committee on Health examined an amendment to the Infection Protection Act 2000. Headed by a member of the
CDU (Erwin Ruddel) which is the party of the Chancellor. |
Main committee to scrutinise public health response to Covid-19 falls within the remit of the Panel on Health
Services. |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses. |
The Speaker attempted to block the establishment of a new committee to oversee Covid-19 legislation
immediately following the election in March 2020. Once a succesful legal challenge was launched to prevent the
Speaker's actions, a Special Committee on Dealing with the Coronavirus was formed in May. This committtee and
others were chaired by members of the opposition. |
Special Committee on Dealing with the Coronavirus was formed in May. This committtee and others were chaired
by members of the opposition |
No special Covid-19 committee formed. Existing committees scrutinised Covid-19 measures. Committee system
significantly disrupted up until mid June when it returned to normal. Unable to determine whether these
committees were chaired by members of oppositon parties. |
Special Select Committee of the House of Representatives of Parliament. Chaired by a government minister
(Minister of Health and Wellness) which was a change from the usual practice of having a member of the
opposition chair important Select committees. DRMA should be scrutinised by a Joint Committee of both houses no
less than three years after it was brought in. So far this has not happened. |
On 8 April 2021, based on a request by 36 MPs, the Saeima decided to set up a parliamentary investigative
committee on the Government’s action regarding Covid-19 management. Committee chaired by Viktors Valainis from
opposition Union of Greens and Farmers Party
(https://bnn-news.com/latvian-parliament-to-compose-a-committee-to-investigate-mistakes-made-during-covid-19-crisis-223740)
|
No special committee to oversee either procedural changes or policy responses to Covid-19 |
No special committee to oversee either procedural changes or policy responses to Covid-19 |
The Covid-19 Justice and Security (Interim Measures) Act 2020, an addition to the Public Health Act 2008, was
subjected to scrutiny in standing committees as any normal Act would |
An Epidemic Response Committee, chaired by the leader of the opposition and with an opposition majority, was
established on 25 March 2020 to scrutinise the government’s response to the pandemic.67 This innovative
committee effectively became New Zealand’s ‘parliament-in-miniature’ during the alert level 3 and 4 lockdown. It
met three mornings a week, questioning key ministers and officials, as well as hearing from experts and those
adversely affected. The committee was quite effective, especially in its first few weeks of operation, and
played an important agenda-setting role in political discourse. But its proceedings eventually became more
partisan and a little less constructive once the height of the emergency passed. The committee was
disestablished on 26 May 2020, once usual parliamentary conditions were fully restored. |
Special Coronavirus Committee was formed in March 2020. Regular committees were also used extensively to
scrutinise responses to the pandemic. Chaired by the President of the Storting who belomged to the Conservatives
who were in coalition government |
Chief among these was the constitution of a National Coordination Committee (NCC) on Covid-19 comprising
ministers from the Federal and Provincial Governments, as well as senior members of the armed forces which was
tasked with developing a strategy to curb transmission of the virus and to mitigate its effects.Chaired by the
Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's appointed adviser throughout |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses |
National Committee for Emergency Situations was used to to declare decrees rather than as an oversight
mechanism |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses. National Coronavirus Command Council (NCCC) is an
inner committee within the cabinet. Not an oversight body. |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses |
Parliamentary Committee for the Social and Economic Reconstruction set up to oversee the effects of the
government's response to Covid-19. The committee was chaired by Patxi López, a senior member of the governing
PSOE (coalition) |
Committee on the Constitution and 15 other influential committees undertook most of the scrutiny of the
response to the pandemic. As a range of committees were used to scrutinise Covid-19 measures, so will have been
headed by members of the opposition |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses |
No committee used for the oversight of Covid-19 responses |
House of Lords Covid-19 Committee chaired by an Independent member |
No real oversight in Congress of the actions of the President. Some disagreement over remote voting though
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Committee chaired by opposition |
Was the committee, or committees, used to scrutinise Covid-19 legislation, chaired by a member of an
opposition party? |
LAC19 country report |
No |
No |
|
|
|
Yes |
No |
Unsure |
No |
|
|
No |
No |
|
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
|
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No |
Yes |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Parliamentary oversight notes |
Notes on parliamentary oversight |
LAC19 country report |
Both houses have the power to intervene in executive decree making through the Standing Bicameral Committee.
Report from this committee is sent to each chamber who can then intervene. The process sees very few decrees
being rejected and this remained the case with Covid-19. President used his majority in the upper chamber and
strong presence in the lower chamber to help approve decrees with only minor exceptions. |
Consent was required from the Main Committee of the National Council for any ordinance. Parliament curtailed
the power of the Health Ministerby placing time limits of stay at home orders. This required reporting of such
moves to the parliament. Parliamentary questions were used throughout as a way to scrutinise the exectuive. |
Belgian Parliament has only relatively weak mechanisms for scrutiny of delegated legislation at its disposal,
since ‘[s]tatutory instruments are not normally subject to specific parliamentary scrutiny and the Ministerial
Decrees do not need to be confirmed or reviewed by the House of Representatives’ [para 29]. ). If the
legislature opposes a regulation, it may repeal the statute providing the powers for its enactment. In respect
of ‘special powers decrees’ there is some opportunity for retrospective legislative scrutiny, since special
powers decrees become void if not confirmed by legislatures within the time period specified by the enabling
act. However, the relatively long time period of one year specified for Covid-19 measures at the Federal level
made this a relatively weak form of scrutiny. |
No constraints on scrutiny through debates and committee proceedings. A good deal of scrutiny through the
amendment of primary legislation. Weaker scrutiny of executive decrees in Congress |
Parliament has not played a significant oversight role (mainly due to the lengthy adjournments) but has
mandated committees to provide ongoing oversight (e.g. Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic set up on
20/4/2020). Oversight of parliament limited by adjournments, unanimous consent procedure and limits placed on
Covid-19 related questions and debate sessions |
Very little direct involvement in the public health response by Congress. Much more involvement and oversight
of the econmic and social responses. New legislation is required for spending by the executive. A number of
committees established to scrutinise the government's response between May and October 2020. Minister of Health
was impeached in September 2020 |
Weak or non-existent powers over oversight |
The Legislative Assembly can exert political control through investigative commissions that can call attention
to a specific governmental issue or action. To date, no such commission has been initiated. \r\n\r\nLegislative
Assembly can harm or hinder the executive’s agenda through the temporary modification of procedural rules.
During the pandemic, the procedure has been used to expedite the passage of bills to amend the national budget
and to approve extraordinary budgetary measures to fund anti-Covid-19 programs |
Formal powers to oversee the executive. But effectively a one-party state in terms of parliamentary
representation which curtials scrutiny and oversight |
Parliament’s oversight takes two forms. First, exceptional powers are put to parliament in the shape of an Act
after a state of emergency is called. Second, provisional exceptions to the basic rights that are made through
Government decrees by virtue of Section 23 of the Constitution during a state of emergency are submitted to the
Parliament. Both pass or fall on a simple majority of Parliament. |
French Parliament generally does not scrutinise secondary legislation [para 32]. So no public health
regulations were scrutinised by parliament. But health emergency was enacted and powers under that could only be
extended beyond a month by means of primary statute, so giving Parliament a veto over powers enacted under the
state of emergency [para 22]. Government was delegated further powers under two statutes which allowed the
government to issue ordinances. Scrutiny over ordinances is weak and are very likely to become law [see main
document for reference], but were subject to a 3 month sunset clause. |
Powers given to the Ministry of Health under section 5 of the Infection Protection Act 2000 requires a
declaration by the Bundestag. If the Bundestag repeals its declaration then all regulations cease with immediate
effect (and there is a sunset clause dated 31/3/2021) [para 35]. But, it is a take it or leave it power as the
Bundestag cannot amend or reject individual regulations. An amendment to section 5 in November 2020 to require
oral reporting by the Federal Government sought to remedy the scrutiny deficit [para 36] |
A weak legislature, but 18 Legislative Council panels are tasked with monitoring the performance of the
government in relation to specific policy areas, including the Panel on Constitutional Affairs, the Panel on
Health Services, and the Panel on Welfare Services. Several of the panels have their own subcommittees. The
Panel on Health Services makes an annual report to the Legislative Council, with the prevention and control of
Covid-19 comprising a major part of the Panel’s work. |
Weak scrutiny towards the executive arising from the supermajoirty size of the governing coalition. |
Sunset clause for the powers given to the Minister for Health by the Health Act 2020. Extension to the
emergency provisions had to be laid beofre parliament after three months and could be annulled by a reolution of
either chamber within 21 days. A Special Committee on Covid-19 Response was established 6/5/2020 and reported on
8/10/2020. Debates were held on Covid-19 measures and committees continued to sit. |
Committees were able to continue their oversight roles despite the caretaker government trying to circumvent
at the beginning of the pandemic. Later, the new coalition weakened some of these mechanisms. Parliamntary
questions were used extensively for oversight purposes. |
Statutory decrees transposed to ordinary legislation after 60 days - this allows parliament to oversee the
activity of the government. Parliament has been able to effectively scrutinise, amend and influence
decree-making powers of the government. |
Special Select Committee on Covid-19 was estbalished and met in a hybrid form. The Prime Minister has broken
tradition by no allowing oversight committees to be chaired by members of the opposition. In March 2020, an
eight-member bipartisan Special Select Committee of the House of Representatives of Parliament was established
to oversee the Government’s response to the pandemic, chaired by the Minister of Health and Wellness. Oversight
has been weakened by failure of the governemnt to circulate information between members of parliament prior to
sessions. |
The Saeima carries out parliamentary scrutiny of the executive branch in numerous ways, including through the
work of its committees. If Members of the Saeima are dissatisfied with the work of a particular sector, they may
submit an inquiry to the government. If the Saeima supports the inquiry, it may decide, in the context of the
inquiry, to hold a vote of confidence in the relevant minister or the entire Cabinet. Additionally, Members of
the Saeima may submit questions to the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, and the Governor of the Bank
of Latvia regarding matters within the scope of competence of these officials. Answers may be submitted in
writing or provided in person at the relevant sitting of the Saeima. |
Weak powers of scrutiny for Parliament versus the government. The legislature exercised a very limited degree
of oversight over the normative acts of the executive, including those relating to quarantining entire areas,
curfews and full closure of businesses and public places, unlike what would be expected in such circumstances.
|
Despite powers for Congress to oversee the response to the pandemic, the first hearing was only held on
30/9/2020. Congress had no say in the declaration of emergency |
The packaging of emergency ordinances into the Covid-19 Justice and Security (Interim Measures) Act 2020 gave
Parlaiement greater powers of scrutiny after intititally having very little power over emergency ordinances |
All secondary legislation reviewed by the Regulations Review Committee, and the Committee’s recommendations
were reflected in later health orders [para 44]. Delegated legisaltion can be disallowed by parliament if
referred by the Committee, but this did not occur during the pandemic. |
Tthe regime under the Norwegian Corona Act 2020 provided for more extensive parliamentary scrutiny of
regulations passed under the Act than for ordinary regulations. Normal ex post scrutiny mechanisms [para 30
& 32] strengthened to include the ability for parliament to veto a regulation (one-third of Storting members
required to veto) to off-set the strong powers of the executive to amend or repeal existing statute (Henry VIII
powers in the UK). Powers could only come into force one day after being introduced to parliament to allow time
for a veto to be issued. |
Executive dominance of the legisalture makes scrutiny difficult. Ordinances have been used that largely avoid
or delayt scrutiny from the legislature. A Joint Parliamnetary Committee was established and chaired by the
Speaker of the National Assembly. But the committee was eventually boycotted by opposition parties who accused
the speaker of bias towards the ruling party. |
Under the state of emergency scrutiny was limited by the reduction in parliamentary activity. Government acted
unchecked between 2/5/2020 and 6/11/2020 |
State of emergency declared by President but must be approved within 5 days by the parliament and each
subsequent 30 day extension had to be approved by parliament. Emergency decress had to be laid before parliament
for ratification (ex post) |
Scrutiny was limited. Committees were often cancelled or moved online and bills were fast tracked. |
Parliament was unable to perform its oversight functions due to the declaration of emergency. |
Weak oversight powers in the face of a strong exectuive supported by a huge majoirty in parliamnet |
The formation of the National Coronavirus Command Council (NCCC) [para 32], which duplicated the National
Disaster Management Centre (NDMC) required by the Disaster Management Act [paras 31 and 32], and limited
accountability. Courts ruled that the Executive could arrange itself as it saw fit, however. The DMA required
the NDMC to submit reports to parliament for scrutiny. |
Special Committee for the response to Covid-19 established. |
Regular scruitny has taken place throughout the pandemic. Extensions of states of alarm have been approved by
Congress. Government measures have been scrutinised by way of interpollations and questions and by ministers
appearing before Committees. A new committee - the Parliamentary Committee for the Social and Economic
Reconstruction - was established on 7/5/2020. The final report of the committee, setting out strategic actions
for the economic recovery from the pandemic, was approved by parliament on 29/7/2020 |
Central oversight role for Committee on the Constitution. 35.\tThe Committee decided on 24 March 2020 to
postpone its usual spring control of the government until further notice on account of the Covid-19 outbreak. On
4 June 2020, the Committee resumed its activities. The Committee has been highly critical of the government's
slow response in its 2021 srping control |
Moderate oversight powers for Parliament. These don't seem to have been used to strongly scrutinise the
government's pandemic response |
Weak oversight powers of parliament since the 2014 coup. No oversight role over exectuive decree or
rule-making powers. The coalition government prematurely closed sessions to prevent debate on three emergency
decrees on the Covid-19 budget |
There is no ongoing parliamentary oversight over ordinary presidential decrees, by-laws, and circulars, all of
which are the main legal instruments in the Covid-19 response. Questions have been answered slowly, or sometimes
not at all, byt the Government |
Widespread exercise of delegated powers [permitted through primary legislation in the case of the Coronavirus
Act 2020] means parliament has not had a chance to scutinise C-19 measures. As of 8/9/2020, 210 Covid-19 UK SIs
had been made - 162 using negative resolution procedures meaning they are immediately effective unless
explicitly voted down. Conventions were broken in regard to laying out SIs under negative procedure 21 days
before coming into force for more than two-thirds of cases. Most of the public health emergency powers enacted
under existing primary legislation requires subsequent ratification, which it received in parliament, although
scrutiny was curtailed during this process. Commons scruitny also curtailed by inability to amend SIs [can only
accept or reject]. Select Committees have played an important oversight role [but this is ex post oversight for
the large part?] |
Congress has not acted to limit the authority of the President during the pandemic. In several states,
however, legislatures have sought to reverse the decisions of governors and health officials, including by
filing court challenges. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Consensus over response |
Was general consensus reached over the response of Covid-19 in the country? |
LAC19 country report |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Uncertain |
No |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
|
|
Yes |
|
Yes |
No |
|
No |
|
| Consensus notes |
Notes on consensus over response |
LAC19 country report |
Opposition parties criticised the suspension in the first month of the pandemic and asked the Supreme Court to
judge on the legal validity of virtual sessions [possibly more for clarity than in opposition to virtual
proceeding]. Local level parliaments moved much faster towards hybrid proceedings. Some opposition legislators
raised concerns about the appropriateness of continued executive rule-making when Congressional law-making was
in full operation |
Opposition parties strongly opposed a provision within the bill which would have given the Federal Minister of
Finance the possibility for an overdraft of up to 28 billion Euros of the expenditures projected in the bill
without giving any details on the purpose of this overdraft except “financial countering of the pandemic”. This
was criticised as being incompatible with the constitutional requirement of a transparent (federal) budget. The
opposition used its slim majoirty in the second chamber to block government initiatives. [Karl has also
mnetioned some subsequent machinations within the governing coalition] |
Changes seem to have been the result of a consensus between the different political groups |
Disgreement between the federal and state levels over certain regulations |
Complaints by the press and by opposition parties due to the political constraints imposed on Parliament
during the pandemic. Closed door negotiations for emergency lawmaking have been criticised. A lack of
representation has been highlighted when Parliament passed Bill C-12, which was emergency legislation, on 13
March, when only “a small number of senior MPs” were present, a disproportionate number were from Ontario and
Quebec. This is problematic as the views expressed during negotiations would not have represented the regional
diversity across Canada. The Conservative Party critiqued the Liberal government’s plan to hold one in-person
sitting in the House of Commons per week, with only a small number of Members of Parliament present, stating
that this was not a sufficient number of in-person sittings. |
No significant complaints about the constitutional amendment or changes in the operation of Congress. |
No opposition parties to complain and press freedom curtailed |
No compliants from opposition parties about the procedural changes. |
No complaints or objections reported. |
No complaints or objections reported |
No complaints or opposition |
Some complaint by the AfD about the requirement to wear masks in the Bundestag |
Consent arises from the lack of opposiiton within parliament |
Consent arises from the lack of opposiiton within parliament |
Opposition parties were generally supportive of the measures but called for more transparency and information
has the response wore on. |
Amidst a political crisis there was significant disagreement and legal challenges to the executives handling
of both the procedural changes in parliament and the wider handling of the pandemic. |
Controversy around the consequences of remote working on the role of parliament, led to no virtual plenary
sessions. Controversy around the limited activity of standing committees during the pandemic, though this was
later resolved. |
Opposition parties complained about the PM's decision to not let oversight committees not be chaired by
opposition members.And criticised the decision not to re-establish main Covid-19 committees following the
Septmeber 2020 election. |
The legality of the e-Saeima process was contested by Limbazi and Ikskile municipalities and therefore
reviewed by the Constitutional Court in Case Number 2020-37-0106 concerning administrative territorial reform.
|
There have been complaints by opposition parties regarding the non-performance of the parliamentary functions
during the first months of the pandemic, mainly due to the refusal by the Secretariat to allow for virtual and
electronic procedures of debate and voting. Most of these complaints were made through political statements.
|
The powers granted in the provision to the General Health Council and the Department of Health have been
criticised by legal scholars as a ‘sanitary dictatorship’ |
There have nevertheless been complaints, mainly by academics, about the possibility for Parliament to meet and
vote digitally. The opinion of the Council of State, according to these academics, is based on a rather generous
interpretation of the Dutch Constitution and constitutional values. |
|
General consensus. Though the Christian Democrats forced a fu |
Recommendations for holding virtual sessions was met with resistance from opposition parties who also
criticised the abruptness of the prorogation. |
No political turmoil or criticism and the rules have been accepted by all parties. |
Unsure from the report. |
Criticism of procedural changes made by oppositon parties. Particularly the fast tracking of Covid bills [and
pandemic opportunism] |
Significant complaint in the press and by opposition parties about the constraints placed on parliamentary
scrutiny during the pandemic response. Some of this criticism centred on the reasoning for the declaration of a
state of emergency. |
Overwehlming support from all parties for the measures |
Criticism of the government's move to form the NCCC, and limit accountability. Resulted in the
constitutionality being challenged in court, but the case was dismissed. |
No documented opposition from parties or in the press |
Complaints by opposition parties that the political constraints on scrutiny were disporportionate. A motion of
censure initoated by the right-wing party Vox was defeated by a vote of 52 to 298 on 22/10.2020 |
General consensus both within and outside parliament [at the time of writing the Sweden report]. There appears
to have been more criticism since - but this has mainly been criticism of the response rather than the
parliamentary procedure changes |
Appears to have been general consensus over the response. In many cases, the governemnt's response has been
hailed as a success |
Opposition parties opposed the closure/suspension of sessions on the grounds that it prevented the opposition
shaping the response to Cvoid-19. However, attempt to get enough signatures to force the Speaker to overturn the
decision failed |
Some parliamentarians expressed the view that virtual meetings were necessary |
Disgreement over the Government's decision to end remote voting in June 2020. The decision to require a
physical presence in order to fully participate ran counter to social distancing measures that limited
attendance in the Commons to just 50 members. Argument that the government ended remote voting and virtual
proceedings for political ends. |
Republicans challenged proxy voting on constitutional grounds. Large degree of disagreement between
states/federal government over the correct response |
opposition parties consistently criticized the measures taken by the Government to tackle the social and
economic effects of the pandemic. opposition parties stated that Article 12 was unconstitutional for the
following reasons |
|
|
The Parliament has not ceased its sessions during the pandemic; thus, there was no need to resort to virtual
meetings. The opposition parties have not complained about the functioning of the Parliament, except for some
MPs. |
|
No political or press complaints have been raised with regards to the move to virtual parliamentary
proceedings, given that the state of emergency decreed by the Government since the beginning of the pandemic
does not prevent the regular functioning of the Parliament. Its operations have not been suspended; on the
contrary, the legislative power has been politically active. |
The government later in November 2020 passed an unusual Appropriation Act for past spending, which was
described by the opposition as unusual and unconstitutional |
|
The opposition was, from the beginning, hostile to these exceptional measures, especially in a context of
serious political tensions, that did not help the management of the health crisis. |
|