The margin for voting on the bill on dangerous and infectious diseases by the Parliament is minimal, since with the beginning of the article-by-article discussion in the Health Committee yesterday, it became clear that the majority of the parties strongly disagree with most of its provisions. In fact, The parties expressed the view that this bill, overthrows the Republic and gives supremacy to the Government, which will be able to decide even when an infectious disease is so dangerous that it is necessary to suspend the operation of the Courts and Parliament.
The reactions recorded during yesterday's meeting of the parliamentary Health Committee, led to the conclusion that the discussion can not continue, if the Minister of Health does not participate in the meetings to give the necessary explanations and clarifications while AKEL, DIKO and Ecologists pointed out that, if not all the necessary amendments are made, the specific bill can not led to the Plenary Session of the Parliament for a vote.
It is reminded that the bill authorizes the Council of Ministers and the Minister of Health to issue decrees aimed at protecting public health and limiting the spread of dangerous infectious diseases. AKEL parliamentary representative George Loukaidis criticized the government, saying that "Chooses to maintain in the bill provisions that are dangerous for democracy and the rule of law as it insists on completely bypassing the Parliament". At the same time, he said, the bill "It does not clarify what constitutes a dangerous infectious disease but provides for the Government to have an unrestricted right to suspend all fundamental rights and freedoms, such as freedom of expression and association." The parliamentary representative of DIKO, Panikos Leonidou, clarified that "The Parliament, as the representative of the people, must maintain the balances provided by the constitution and the executive power must not be given absolute power to issue decrees", while the president of the Ecologists, Charalambos Theopemptou, stated that the Ecologists "They will not support the bill as long as it gives incredible omnipotence to the minister to close even the Parliament, to make decisions as to what is a dangerous disease and until there is no consultation with the Parliament and there is no reference to the WHO urgings".
Yesterday's meeting discussed at length the fact that the bill has no provision to define what a pandemic is, with MEPs arguing that there should be a clear reference to the decisions of the World Health Organization which is the competent international body to declare the planet in a state of pandemic, if this is required for the purposes of protecting public health.
The Democratic Alarm MPs seem to have a different attitude towards the bill with the chairwoman of the Committee, Savvia Orfanidou, to mention that "The Legal Service clarified that the bill is completely constitutional", while noting that "the disagreements submitted by parliamentary parties were taken into account by the Ministry of Health in the revised text." "Today we started the article-by-article discussion in the Health Committee of the law on dangerous infectious diseases. The aim of the bill is the abolition of the law on decontamination that has been in force since 1932 and the modernization of the legal framework taking into account the experiences and lessons we have learned and I hope we have learned in the context of the pandemic. ", he added and added that "there were some strong political disagreements on individual issues about this and in the next session on this issue we will call the Minister of Health in order to be able to reach these important issues always within a framework of cooperation. and sympathy ".
philenews.com