Sunday, June 21, 2020

How Iceland Beat the Pandemic Without Imposing a Lockdown

This article is by

Share this article

Article Contributor(s)

Nikhita Gautam

Article Title

How Iceland Beat the Pandemic Without Imposing a Lockdown

Publisher

Global Views 360

Publication Date

June 21, 2020

URL

Downtown Reykjavik, Iceland

Downtown Reykjavik, Iceland | Source: Robingileo via Wikimedia

Like the rest of the world, Iceland also has to face the COVID-19 situation. This European country of approximately 3.5 lakh population registered the first case of COVID-19 virus on the 1st March 2020 and the number of the infected hit a peak on the 5th May 2020. The active cases declining afterwards and on 24th of May there were only three active cases. Iceland’s response to COVID-19 has been widely lauded.

The country’s small population enabled extensive testing; instead of simply testing symptomatic or exposed people, also tested the general population. Along with the Icelandic health authorities, deCode Genetics, which is an organization committed to mapping and understanding the human genome, undertook the task of testing the general and non-symptomatic population for free. Consequently, Iceland has tested a higher portion of inhabitants than any other country, making it easier to trace how the infection spreads. There has been no lockdown imposed; however, the government has been taking measures to spread awareness for voluntary self-quarantine measures. The government also banned gatherings of more than 20 people on 24th of March which was relaxed to 200 from 25th of May.

The strategy followed by the government of Iceland was based on robust testing, contact tracing of infections, social distancing, increasing public’s awareness of hand-sanitation and voluntary self-quarantine, along with strict measures in healthcare institutions. Through effective contact tracing the healthcare workers were able to reach out to people who came in contact with COVID-19 infected people and recommend them to self-quarantine.

The government was very open in communicating with the citizens on the status of COVID-19 situation in the country. Half an hour long daily briefing on Iceland’s local response to the pandemic was relayed on the public’s screens for the past months until the 25th of May. The briefings were led by Þórólfur Guðnason, Alma Möller and Víðir Reynisson who are the Chief Epidemiologist, Director of Health and Director of Iceland’s Department of Civil Protection and Emergency Management respectively.

Iceland has shown that robust testing regime, contact tracing, and clear communication to the public can be very effective in controlling the COVID-19 before it could turn into a pandemic.

Support us to bring the world closer

To keep our content accessible we don't charge anything from our readers and rely on donations to continue working. Your support is critical in keeping Global Views 360 independent and helps us to present a well-rounded world view on different international issues for you. Every contribution, however big or small, is valuable for us to keep on delivering in future as well.

Support Us

Share this article

Read More

February 4, 2021 5:00 PM

With a new Anti-Terror Act: Philippines take another step towards authoritarianism

On July 3, 2020, President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte signed a new Anti-Terrorism Bill, which was rushed through the houses of Congress without appropriate discussion, and has amassed protests and disapproval within the nation and abroad since its draft was first announced.

The Confederation of Lawyers in Asia and Pacific (COLAP) has raised concerns that anti-terrorism bill of the Philippine government is “violative of human rights and the due process of the law.” It's statement opposing the the bill stated following concerns with the bill:

  1. It punishes suspected individuals for organizations who are proscribed as terrorists and that the very broad and vague definition of terrorism under the bill poses danger to the basic freedoms of the people.
  2. The suspect’s right to due process of law is virtually denied and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty by a court is virtually negated.
  3. It enable the President-backed Anti-Terrorism Council to label any individual or group as a terrorist “without the opportunity of being heard.
  4. Any member or sympathizer of a proscribed organization is punished as a terrorist even if he or she does not actually take arms against the government.
  5. The bill encroaches on one’s privacy as it gives the government access to personal and bank information and freezes bank accounts and assets.
  6. The bill violates the sovereign rights of states and the internationally mandated norm that criminal jurisdiction is confined to the territories of a state, citing its extraterritorial nature.

Hundreds of protestors took to the streets of Manila protesting the bill on 27th July when President Duterte gave his annual State of the Nation address. While it is true that the has nation faced the threat of terrorism in recent years, it is also agreed upon that Duterte’s response has been perhaps equally brutal.

This bill was also criticised by the Christian religious organisations which issued a joint declaration on this law. They stated “We are bothered by the broad and vague definition of terrorism and terrorist. It can include acts of dissent, free speech, right to assemble, right to organize, freedom of belief, among others. By such a broad definition it is open to abuse and misuse.”

An opposition Congress member, Edcel Lagman and two lawyer groups of Philippine approached the Philippine Supreme Court and asked it to strike down the new anti-terrorism law, or parts of it, as they called it unconstitutional for infringing on civil liberties.

The Philipino American Student Association (FASA) also denounced the new anti-terrorism law in its Instagram post which stated, “FASA sa UW denounces Duterte’s signing of the Anti-Terrorism Bill to which its terms do nothing to resolve the true terrorism in our nation and instead conducts an outright assault on the freedom of speech from our people living on the motherland and even Filipinx abroad,”

International Human Right organisation, Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific Regional Director, Nicholas Bequelin, in response to this law said, “Under Duterte’s presidency, even the mildest government critics can be labelled terrorists. He further stated, “This law’s introduction is the latest example of the country’s ever-worsening human rights record. Once again, this shows why the UN should launch a formal investigation into ongoing widespread and systematic violations in the country.”

Prior to this, Duterte’s ‘war on drugs’ received global scrutiny, especially for the numerous extrajudicial killings that have occurred since he came to power and the effect of this aggressive policy on the poorest citizens of the nation.

Apart from this, he has also repeatedly voiced opinions in favour of martial law and silenced news media that spoke against him. But he seems to be encouraged largely by his own people, among whom Duterte continues to be popular.

Many have called Duterte the ‘revival’ of authoritarianism in the small Southeast Asian country, which has only recently seen some semblance of democracy after years of dictatorship under Ferdinand Marcos (of whom Duterte was a close family friend).

The Philippines is walking a thin line between fascism and democracy, and which side it ends up on depends not only on the actions of its government, but just as much on the actions of its people.

Read More