“If governments are allowed to impose indefinite and disproportionate restrictions on access to information, free expression, free assembly and privacy in the name of stopping COVID-19, the negative effects will extend far beyond this outbreak” (Funk & Linzer, 2020, para. 10). This quote raises red flags about the government’s attitudes toward human rights. Can we really trust our government and our authorities during a crisis? Do they really have our best interest at hand? Human history contains multiple examples of political leaders crumbling in a crisis. I could not forget the moment when my interests were disregarded because of the necessity to follow newly imposed social restrictions. It was hard to believe that people could not address their basic right to freedom and security.
When I had no opportunity to leave my house due to social isolation or must wear a mask in public places, many of my core values and beliefs about logic, comfort, and balance were damaged. The government got a chance to use the coronavirus as a pretext to crack down on human rights and introduce new freedom issues, focusing on security and safety.
Today, I still cannot accept that someone should decide whether it is safe for me to go outside, go shopping, or meet my family. For a long time, I was confident in my right to balance my needs, live in comfort, and follow logic in every activity. The pandemic was a serious challenge, but I was sure I could handle it with my rights and beliefs. However, when I could not visit a relative who was sick because the government did not allow me to do it, I was angry and frustrated about the power that restricted my desires. There was no balance and comfort in social isolation, and I understood that the government affected my core values and beliefs. I did not want to believe it was the moment when I could do nothing to protect my interests without being accused of breaking the law.
During the last several years, the fast-spreading impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was inevitable in many countries. With the coronavirus being so deadly, the right thing to do would be to ban all gatherings; logically, that would make sense. Well, Moscow did just that, with more than 5,000 attendees could gather. “This announcement came on the same day President Vladimir Putin endorsed a proposal allowing him to remain in office until 2036” (Funk, & Linzer, 2020 para. 1).
Remarkably interesting that Putin was endorsing himself during a pandemic. I find this an act of tyranny and misbalance to place himself in a position where he can rule for another decade at a time no one can protest. The connection from the abuse of power during the pandemic is a negative side effect on the largest scale. Other countries have also adapted to creating a limitation to their people’s freedom. “Even now, the Chinese government is placing its political goals above public health” (Roth, 2020, para. 3). The task was not only to protect human health but to see how effective political decisions could be in the country.
China proclaimed that the coronavirus was tamed and would not allow independent verification. “Residents must use a new app that determines their health status, assigning a color-coded designation based on unspecified criteria to dictate whether they can move freely” (Funk, & Linzer, 2020 para. 4). China authorities have been citing COVID-19 to expand their monitoring capabilities as it felt the necessity of enhancing their public health surveillance and automatically sharing the users’ location with police. It was another example of whether people could move freely, showing how human rights were stripped away.
Throughout the coronavirus outbreak, liberal democracies have been risking normalizing emergency measures. Some steps were radical, while other ideas questioned the possibility of continuing to live a free and secure life. For example, “the International Women’s Day rally” was banned, and only gatherings of not more than 500 people “with no confirmed cases” were allowed (Funk & Linzer, 2020, para. 7). Democracies are disregarding normal emergency protocols for the sake of pressuring people into giving up their rights. What I see is the authorities doing what they must to detour you from human rights. According to Kristof (2002), “our entire system of civil liberties is at risk” (para. 7).
However, such restricted decisions were made far before the pandemic to check if the government could affect society. Today, the government holds all the power in its hands to impose its will to do anything they want to do. If not handled with a sense of sensibility toward its people, everyone will suffer an ongoing deterioration in basic freedoms (Funk & Linzer, 2020). The abuse of power the authorities use will make or break us as a nation if not used right.
Since the coronavirus outbreak, power abuse has been one of the hottest topics addressing the quality of the government’s work. About 27 percent of the survey participants supported this idea in the study where “officials and security services perpetrated violence against civilians, detained people without justification, and overstepped their legal authority” (Repucci & Slipowitz, 2020, p. 3). Our nation is in trouble. We cannot maintain a healthy lifestyle if our authorities make us suffer. Governments have also been using the pandemic to justify granting themselves special powers to protect public health. COVID-19 was a good reason for strengthening the military regime and repressing political activists, rights defenders, and even doctors who tried to break the system (Repucci & Slipowitz, 2020). Our authorities have allowed the coronavirus to corrupt their minds and affect public freedoms.
“Each time, there was a reason to be afraid. Each time, we found our balance.” (Haynes, 2015, para. 14). This was quoted about our government losing its balance. Even though our nation has endured many falls, we always seem to get back up through it all. As it stands, our government needs to rekindle its stability. Our authorities are supposed to protect us, but instead, we are in a self-conflicting war among ourselves, having to fight for our rights. Our authorities represent our nation and our nation’s identity.
Limitations on one’s fundamental freedoms should never be used to abuse power for political purposes, not only in dealing with the coronavirus. Leaders are put in place to make our life safe and secure. Their responsibilities require them to execute proficiently in a crisis. How do our authorities gain our trust back? They would have to return to where they made a vow to our country. This vow stated they would protect and serve. Scary, things are not looking up. We have a lost and self-centered government.
References
Funk, A., & Linzer, I. (2020). How the coronavirus could trigger a backslide on freedom around the world. Washington Post. Web.
Kristof, N. D. (2002). Security and freedom. New York Times. Web.
Haynes, D. D. (2015). Liberty vs. security: An old debate renewed in the age of terror. Milwaukee Wisconsin Journal Sentinel. Web.
Roth, K. (2020). How authoritarians are exploiting the Covid-19 crisis to grab power. Human Rights Watch. Web.
Repucci, S., & Slipowitz, A. (2020). Democracy under lockdown: The impact of COVID-19 on the global struggle for freedom. Freedom House. Web.