[ad_1]
However, the Constitutional Court (VfGH) granted the Ministry of Health a reparation period until the end of the year in its ruling published this Thursday. This means that the distance rule remains in effect for now. Several anti-crown measures that had already expired were also unconstitutional. The need for the measures was not sufficiently justified.
The Constitutional Court ruled in July that violations of fundamental rights to fight a pandemic are only permissible if the government weighs interests against other fundamental rights. Therefore, the government must document the extent to which interventions to combat the pandemic are adequate, necessary and appropriate.
In the case of the bar distance rule, however, this was not done. In the relevant documents of the Ministry of Social Affairs, the top judges found several draft ordinances, an attendance list and several emails “from various offices outside the department”, but “no aspect justifying the issuance of the ordinance.” Therefore, the distance rule contested by several restaurateurs has been repealed.
However, the Ministry of Health has until the end of the year to repair it. Therefore, this can be done with the new adjustment that is now imminent.
In addition, the Constitutional Court has stated that other anti-crown measures that have already expired were illegal. Specifically, this refers to the general ban on entering restaurants and car washes (not connected to a gas station), the restriction of groups of visitors in pubs to four people, the ban on events with more than ten people (even in nightclubs) and the requirement to wear a mask in closed rooms. However, all these rules are no longer in effect. The subsequent cancellation has no consequences.
