Abstract
<jats:p>During the COVID-19 virus pandemic, individuals and society as a whole faced challenges in the field of physical and mental health, but also a number of other problems caused by the virus and various measures, mainly related to re- striction of freedom of movement and freedom of assembly. Apart from the heal- th aspects of the global pandemic and its impact on the world economy, the social and legal aspects are extremely important, especially in the field of respect and protection of guaranteed human rights as one of the basic postulates of modern democratic society. Today, individuals, various non-governmental, regional and world organizations, are trying to answer the question when and to what extent their restriction is justified and expedient, and where are the limits of action of the state government and its representatives in situations when they are obliged to protect the general safety and public health of the population. Between March 2020 and June 2020, most EU member-states, 19 of them, adopted the constitutional emergency state, the emergency regime prescribed by the law, or both, while a smaller number of countries, 8 of them, made it possi- ble for their governments to adopt measures of restriction by means of special or common legislation. High expectations and hopes that vaccination (which 70% of the world population have undergone) and a collective immunity acquired after a certain number of people have recovered from the virus would restore “normal life” in the world are slowly losing their credibility as new variants multiply with every coming wave. At the same time, questions arise as to which vaccine (made by which manufacturer) protects from which variant and in what period of time, which, for states, sets a complex task of determining more precisely the conditi- ons for travelling and border-crossing. The present situation caused by the pande- mic is a test for states and legal systems. In the meantime, the wide availability of vaccines, insufficient information among citizens about the differences between the offered vaccines, possible side effects, and the duration of protection and its effectiveness, put to the test not only the professional public in the field of heal- th, but every person who was and still is in situation to make a decision, taking into account not only his own well-being and the possible consequences of (non)vaccination, but also the well-being of people in his immediate environment. At the same time, many made the decision as a result of facing direct or indirect pre- ssures, which were related to the loss or limitation of the enjoyment of rights gu- aranteed until then. All over the world, we witnessed threatened labor rights, the right to privacy and protection of personal data, the right to free expression of opinion, the right to health care, the right to education, and many other rights whose realization, almost overnight, has been called into question, if vaccination was missed. On the other hand, arguments were emphasized that personal free- dom and the right to choose are not and can never be above the general interest of the community to protect its members and its survival in pandemic conditi- ons, insisting on vaccination. This collection contains 12 works by authors from six countries. Our in- tention was to prepare a collection that will make a modest contribution to the analysis of some current issues, arising from events during the last three challe- ning years, related to vaccination. We thank the authors for their dedication and quality works, which is why we believe that this collection will be important to a wider range of readers in the years ahead.</jats:p>