Academic literature on the topic 'Hate speech – Law and legislation – France'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Hate speech – Law and legislation – France.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Hate speech – Law and legislation – France"
1
Shukla, Aakriti, and Amaresh Patel. "RISE OF THE HATE SPEECH, CONSEQUENCES AND LEGISLATION." Dogo Rangsang Research Journal 12 (2022): 145–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.36893/drsr.2022.v12i09n02.145-149.
Full textAbstract:
The goal of this research study is to shed light on the present rise in hate speech and its various elements. It provides an illustrated definition of what constitutes hate speech and explains how counter-speech might be utilised to quell such speech. Controlling hate speech has proven to be a challenging task. The anti-hate speech law is contentious since it restricts someone's ability to express themselves freely. The legal system continuously treads a fine line between control and outright prohibition.“But cases of hate speech are nevertheless on the rise despite the introduction of strict legislation. The Law Commission of India pushed for even tighter regulations in 2017 to curb this. In light of the obvious harm that hate speech does, it is vital to look beyond the current framework and uncover best practises that may be employed to address the issue of hate speech in addition to the legal framework.”1
2
Gaïni, Sigri. "Universities and other Institutions – not Hate Speech Laws – are a threat to Freedom of Political Speech." Etikk i praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, no. 1 (June 23, 2022): 5–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.5324/eip.v16i1.4826.
Full textAbstract:
One of the strongest arguments against hate speech legislation is the so-called Argument from Political Speech. This argument problematizes the restrictions that might be placed on political opinions or political critique when these opinions are expressed in a way which can be interpreted as ‘hateful’ towards minority groups. One of the strongest free speech scholars opposing hate speech legislation is Ronald Dworkin, who stresses that having restrictions on hate speech is, in fact, illegitimate in a liberal democracy. The right to express oneself freely concerning any political decision is, according to Dworkin, a core democratic principle; it is what self-governance – and hence liberal democracies – are built upon. Dworkin and many other free speech scholars based in the United States see hate speech legislation as a threat to expressing oneself freely and critically. I argue that Dworkin and other US-based free speech scholars tend to overlook actual hate speech legislation in countries where such laws have been implemented and have functioned for decades. Furthermore, I argue that the real threat against political speech lies not in hate speech legislation but rather outside of the law, namely, in private institutions such as universities and museums. Restrictions on political speech in various societal circumstances have been on the rise over the last decades – first and foremost in the US. I analyse why these restrictions on political speech are more widespread in the only Western country without laws against hate speech than they are in countries with implemented hate speech laws. Keywords: political speech, hate speech, hate speech legislation, private institu-tions, universities, USA
3
Neller, Jen. "The Need for New Tools to Break the Silos: Identity Categories in Hate Speech Legislation." International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy 7, no. 2 (June 1, 2018): 75–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v7i2.501.
Full textAbstract:
The implications of specifying certain identity categories have been widely debated in the context of hate crime laws and policies. However, they have been less thoroughly examined in the particular contexts of hate speech. Although the majority of laws regulating speech do not differentiate between identity categories, the ‘stirring up’ offences of the United Kingdom Public Order Act 1986 are stratified along grounds of race, religion and sexual orientation. This article argues that, while the concerns raised about identity categories in relation to hate crime legislation are equally relevant to the stirring up provisions, the proposed solutions cannot automatically be transposed to hate speech offences. Accordingly, this article explores challenges that are encountered in attempts to make hate crime and hate speech legislation more inclusive before advancing some tentative suggestions for how hate speech laws might move beyond identity silos.
4
Galyashina, Elena I., and Vladimir D. Nikishin. "The concept of hate speech as a threat to the information security of Internet communication." Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law 12, no. 3 (2021): 555–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2021.305.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to a comprehensive examination of the hate speech phenomenon in the aspect of legal and linguistic support for countering the information threats of Internet communication. The legal and linguistic analysis of the concept of “hate speech” is carried out by the authors according to the approaches of the European Court of Human Rights in the context of human rights and freedoms, as well as the protection of national security, constitutional order, public order, health and morality of the population. Verbal extremism as a criminalized part of hate speech is considered in the article from the standpoint of Russian, international and foreign legislation. The authors also analyzed the correlation of the following legal phenomena in international law: verbal religious extremism, insulting the feelings of believers, blasphemy and defamation of religions. The analysis of the scientists’ positions regarding the concept of “hate speech” and its criminalized part — verbal extremism: the analysis of the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights, the Council of Europe, the United Nations, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe regarding what kind of speech acts should be criminally punishable; as well as the analysis of the elements of crimes covered by the concept of “hate speech” in the criminal law of foreign states allowed the authors to formulate a list of features corresponding to extremist speech acts.
5
Jenny Iffanny Harahap, H. Nurianto Rahmand Soepadmo, and Ida Bagus Anggapurana Pidada. "Upaya Polda Bali Dalam Meminimalisir Tindak Pidana Ujaran Kebencian Melalui Sosial Media." Formosa Journal of Sustainable Research 1, no. 1 (June 28, 2022): 21–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.55927/fjsr.v1i1.612.
Full textAbstract:
The legal regulations for the crime of hate speech have been regulated in the Criminal Code and also Law concerning information and electronic transactions. In this study using empirical juridical methods with interview qualitative techniques. This study aims to determine the efforts of the Bali Police in minimizing the crime of hate speech on social media The role of the Bali Police in dealing is carried out through preventive and repressive efforts. Preventive efforts are carried out by providing counseling to the public regarding the impact of the crime of hate speech on social media. Meanwhile, repressive efforts have been carried out, namely taking firm action against perpetrators of criminal acts based on legislation that regulates hate speech
6
Kim, Sung-Hee, Na-Kyung Seong, Hyun-Jun Seong, Seong-Hyun Kim, Min-Sun Kim, Yeon-Je Lee, and Joon-Sung Kwon. "The Study on understanding the Nature of Hate Speech : Exploring the legislation of hate speech overseas: US, UK, Canada, and France." Korean Police Studies Review 18, no. 1 (March 31, 2019): 3–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.38084/2019.18.1.1.
Full text
7
Dascălu, Ștefan, and Florentina Hristea. "Towards a Benchmarking System for Comparing Automatic Hate Speech Detection with an Intelligent Baseline Proposal." Mathematics 10, no. 6 (March 16, 2022): 945. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/math10060945.
Full textAbstract:
Hate Speech is a frequent problem occurring among Internet users. Recent regulations are being discussed by U.K. representatives (“Online Safety Bill”) and by the European Commission, which plans on introducing Hate Speech as an “EU crime”. The recent legislation having passed in order to combat this kind of speech places the burden of identification on the hosting websites and often within a tight time frame (24 h in France and Germany). These constraints make automatic Hate Speech detection a very important topic for major social media platforms. However, recent literature on Hate Speech detection lacks a benchmarking system that can evaluate how different approaches compare against each other regarding the prediction made concerning different types of text (short snippets such as those present on Twitter, as well as lengthier fragments). This paper intended to deal with this issue and to take a step forward towards the standardization of testing for this type of natural language processing (NLP) application. Furthermore, this paper explored different transformer and LSTM-based models in order to evaluate the performance of multi-task and transfer learning models used for Hate Speech detection. Some of the results obtained in this paper surpassed the existing ones. The paper concluded that transformer-based models have the best performance on all studied Datasets.
8
Grisyan, Ridho, Sunarto DM, and Heni Siswanto. "The Law Enforcement Of Hate Speech Crime In Polda Lampung." Ius Poenale 2, no. 1 (March 17, 2021): 45–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.25041/ip.v2i1.2158.
Full textAbstract:
Criminal acts related to hate speech are one of the crimes that occur as a result of the misuse of information technology carried out by a person or group by conveying forms of provocation, seditious actions, or in the form of insults to someone or certain other groups in terms of various indicators, namely race, skin, gender, religion and others. Research problems: how are the efforts to deal with the criminal act of distributing electronic information containing hate speech at POLDA Lampung and why there are obstacles to efforts to overcome the criminal act of distributing electronic information containing hate speech at the Regional Police located in Lampung Province. This type of research is a normative juridical research. The data analysis was done qualitatively. The approach to the problem used is the statute approach. The results of this study indicate that the law enforcement of hate speech using social media is carried out by the Sub-Directorate for Cyber Crime of POLDA Lampung through non-penal and penal means. Non-penal efforts are carried out by carrying out cyber patrols and socializing the prohibition on hate speech using social media. Penal efforts carried out by investigation and investigation. The factors that hinder efforts to overcome criminal acts of hate speech by using social media are in the aspects of legislation, aspects of law enforcement officials, facilities and infrastructure, community conditions and cultural aspects of these factors, there are dominant factors being weaknesses, namely in the aspect of law enforcers who are not yet competent and have mastered the development of types of crimes related to information technology, precisely at the Cyber Police Unit in Lampung Province.
9
DI ROSA, ALESSANDRO. "PERFORMATIVE HATE SPEECH ACTS. PERLOCUTIONARY AND ILLOCUTIONARY UNDERSTANDINGS IN INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW." Age of Human Rights Journal, no. 12 (June 13, 2019): 105–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.17561/tahrj.n12.6.
Full textAbstract:
The first part of this work analyses the concept of hate speech and its legal-philosophical foundations linked to freedom of speech, through the use of tools provided by current trends in the theory of performativity. The second part, in turn, aims to suggest two possible perspectives on the translation of these philosophical demands into positive legislation within human rights law: the first one based on a liberal conception of freedom as non-interference and a perlocutionary understanding of performative speech acts; the second one adopting a neo-republican interpretation of freedom as non-domination and an illocutionary understanding of speech acts. Finally, the work aims to critically sift through the application of the theory of performativity to the legal definitions that hate speech has acquired within this context.
10
Teršek, Andraž. "Common and Comprehensive European Definition of Hate-Speech Alternative Proposal." Open Political Science 3, no. 1 (January 1, 2020): 213–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/openps-2020-0019.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractEurope needs to define the term and legal (criminal & constitutional) concept of “hate speech” precisely. The definition must be written in legal literature and in legislation. It must also be offered by the European Constitutional Courts and, last but not least, by the ECtHR. A descriptive definition offered inter alia by the ECtHR judgement in case of Vejdeland vs. Sweden (2012) was only a guidance. The new ECtHR judgement in the case of Carl Jóhann Lilliendahl vs. Iceland (11th of June 2020) addressed “homophobic speech” as “hate speech” directly. By combining the ECtHR case-law on freedom of expression in the last five years with understanding of this concept in the Slovenian Criminal Code (and with only subordinated reference to the understanding of this term by the European Commission) the author offers an alternative proposal for a new, common and comprehensive European definition of “hate speech.”
Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Hate speech – Law and legislation – France"
1
Janse, van Rensburg Leanne. "The violence of language : contemporary hate speech and the suitability of legal measures regulating hate speech in South Africa." Thesis, Rhodes University, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1001866.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis unites law and social science so as to give a comprehensive account of the phenomenon of racial hate speech in South Africa as an obstacle to transformation. Hate speech is presented as a form of violent language and an affront to the constitutional rights of freedom of speech, equality and dignity. To establish the nature of hate speech, the fluid quality of language is explored so as to show how language can be manipulated, on the one hand, as a means to harm, and employed, on the other hand, as a tool to heal and reconcile. This double gesture is illustrated through the South African linguistic experience of past hate and segregation and the current transformation agenda. It is through this prism that hate speech regulation is discussed as an uneasy fit in a country where freedom of expression is constitutionally protected and where language plays an important role in bringing about reconciliation, and yet words are still being employed to divide and dehumanise. This reality necessitates a clearly articulated stance on the regulation of language. The thesis accordingly interrogates the current legal standards in relation to hate speech with reference to international law that binds South Africa and the constitutional standard set for the regulation of language and the prohibition of hate speech. Thereafter, the current and proposed legislative prohibitions on hate speech, the residual common law provisions governing expression and the regulation of language in the media are outlined and analysed. These legal frameworks are explored in terms of their content and their application in various fora so as to ascertain what the South African approach to hate speech prohibition is, whether it is consistent and, ultimately if it is indeed suitable to the South African experience and the realities of language. This thesis concludes that contemporary hate speech measures lack a coherent understanding of what hate speech entails and a general inconsistency in approach as well as application is found in the treatment of hate speech complaints in South Africa. This is explained through the fallibility of language as a medium to regulate expression and solutions are offered to not only taper current and proposed hate speech provisions but to also consider alternative forms of resolving hate speech complaints
2
Elbahtimy, Mona Ahmed Hassan. "The right to be free from the harm of hate speech in international human rights law : an analysis of a difficult evolutionary path." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2014. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.648696.
Full textBooks on the topic "Hate speech – Law and legislation – France"
1
Delcroix, Eric. Description, analyse et critique de la Loi du 1er juillet 1972 dite antiraciste. Paris: Editions de la Libre parole, 1988.
Find full text
2
Commission nationale consultative des Droits de l'homme (CNCDH). La lutte contre le négationnisme: Bilan et perspectives de la loi du 13 juillet 1990 tendant à réprimer tout acte raciste, antisémite ou xénophobe : actes du colloque du 5 juillet 2002 à laCour d'appel de Paris. Paris: Documentation française, 2003.
Find full text
3
Hate speech, sex speech, free speech. Westport, Conn: Praeger, 1997.
Find full text
4
Campus hate speech on trial. Lawrence, Kan: University Press of Kansas, 1998.
Find full text
5
J, Maschke Karen, ed. Pornography, sex work, and hate speech. New York: Garland Pub., 1997.
Find full text
6
Campus Hate Speech on Trial. Lawrence Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 1998.
Find full text
7
Campus hate speech on trial. 2nd ed. Lawrence, Ks: University Press of Kansas, 2009.
Find full text
8
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, ed. Ugolovnoe pravo stran OBSE protiv prestupleniĭ nenavisti, vozbuzhdenii︠a︡ nenavisti i i︠a︡zyka vrazhdy. Moskva: Informat︠s︡ionno-analiticheskiĭ t︠s︡entr "Sova", 2014.
Find full text
9
Chae Ilbon Taehan Minʼguk Mindan. Chungang Ponbu, ed. Heito supīchi (sabetsu sendō hyōgen) o yurushitewa ikenai. Tōkyō-to Shinjuku-ku: Shinkansha, 2014.
Find full text
10
Speak no evil: The triumph of hate speech regulation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Hate speech – Law and legislation – France"
1
Neller, Jen. "Hate Speech Law and Equality: A Cautionary Tale for Advocates of “Stirring up Gender Hatred” Offences." In Towards Gender Equality in Law, 153–74. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98072-6_8.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractDebates about hate speech legislation tend to be dominated by the conflict between freedom of expression on the one hand and freedom from the harms of hatred on the other; it is pervasively claimed that a balance must be struck between these competing interests. This chapter carefully examines this framing of the issue, drawing on parliamentary debates to foreground the classificatory assumptions and power imbalances that are at play in such purportedly neutral balancing exercises. These insights are used to contextualise the question of whether the stirring up hatred offences of England and Wales should be extended to encompass gender hatred. With a focus on the pursuit of intersectional equality, the chapter raises important dynamics that advocates of such offences should consider beyond the headline issue of free speech.
2
George, Cherian. "United States: Exceptional Freedoms, Fabricated Fears." In Hate Spin. The MIT Press, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262035309.003.0006.
Full textAbstract:
The United States has exceptionally strong Constitutional protections for free speech, but also for religious freedom. This chapter considers how this unique legal framework affects hate spin in the country. It finds that although hate speech can be expressed with a high degree of impunity, strong anti-discrimination laws limit the harms caused by such speech. Hate spin can, nonetheless, succeed in fostering fear and cultivating prejudice against minorities. The chapter examines how a network of anti-Muslim activists have used hate spin to campaign against mosque building, to oppose multi-cultural textbooks, and to introduce legislation protecting states from the fabricated threat of encroaching Muslim law. Beyond their stated goals, which may be frustrated by courts, these campaigns often have the symbolic purpose of spreading Islamophobia.
3
Sherwood, Yvonne. "4. Blasphemy and law." In Blasphemy: A Very Short Introduction, 68–88. Oxford University Press, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198797579.003.0004.
Full textAbstract:
‘Blasphemy and law’ focuses on blasphemy laws, considering the challenge of differentiating between blasphemy and heresy. In order to pinpoint some kind of distinction between the two, historians and legal scholars often cite the contrast between the Hales judgment of 1676 and the Coleridge judgment of 1883. The chapter then assesses the idea of blasphemy as a ‘medieval’ crime, before tracing the evolution of blasphemy laws. One of the things that legal experts often say about blasphemy is that it has been secularized. Whereas once it applied to the purely sacred, now it applies to the social. Finally, the difference between hate speech and blasphemy legislation is an important point of discussion.
4
Breunig, Christian, Emiliano Grossman, and Tinette Schnatterer. "Connecting Government Announcements and Public Policy." In Comparative Policy Agendas, 300–316. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198835332.003.0030.
Full textAbstract:
A key component of democratic governance is that elected governments implement their promises. This chapter advances previous work on electoral pledges by systematically linking governments’ announcements in speeches to their actual legislative behavior. Results show that introducing a political topic during a government speech substantively increases the amount of legislation in this particular policy domain. The study utilizes two series of comparative policy agendas—government speeches and legislation—from eight countries—Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States—for the period between 1983 and 2004. In addition to the direct link from speeches to legislation, the chapter also examines a number of prevalent alternative mechanisms of law production such as institutional effects, economic context, or party ideology.
5
Goldsmith, Jack, and Tim Wu. "Introduction: Yahoo!" In Who Controls the Internet? Oxford University Press, 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195152661.003.0004.
Full textAbstract:
Marc Knobel is a French Jew who has devoted his life to fighting neo-Nazism, a fight that has taken him repeatedly to the Internet and American websites. In February 2000, Knobel was sitting in Paris, searching the Web for Nazi memorabilia. He went to the auction site of yahoo.com, where to his horror he saw page after page of swastika arm bands, SS daggers, concentration camp photos, and even replicas of the Zyklon B gas canisters. He had found a vast collection of Nazi mementos, for sale and easily available in France but hosted on a computer in the United States by the Internet giant Yahoo. Two years earlier, Knobel had discovered Nazi hate sites on America Online and threatened a public relations war. AOL closed the sites, and Knobel assumed that a similar threat against Yahoo would have a similar effect. He was wrong. AOL, it turned out, was atypical. Located in the Washington, D.C. suburbs, AOL had always been sensitive to public relations, politics, and the realities of government power. It was more careful than most Internet companies about keeping offensive information off its sites. Yahoo, in contrast, was a product of Silicon Valley’s 1990s bubble culture. From its origins as the hobby of Stanford graduate students Jerry Yang and David Filo, Yahoo by 2000 had grown to be the mighty “Lord of the Portals.” At the time, Yahoo was the Internet entrance point for more users than any other website, with a stock price, as 2000 began, of $475 per share. Yang, Yahoo’s billionaire leader, was confident and brash—he “liked the general definition of a yahoo: ‘rude, unsophisticated, uncouth.’” Obsessed with expanding market share, he thought government dumb, and speech restrictions dumber still. Confronted by an obscure activist complaining about hate speech and invoking French law, Yang’s company shrugged its high-tech shoulders. Mark Knobel was not impressed. On April 11, 2000, he sued Yahoo in a French court on behalf of the International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism and others. Yahoo’s auctions, he charged, violated a French law banning trafficking in Nazi goods in France.
Reports on the topic "Hate speech – Law and legislation – France"
1
Mahdavian, Farnaz. Germany Country Report. University of Stavanger, February 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.31265/usps.180.
Full textAbstract:
Germany is a parliamentary democracy (The Federal Government, 2021) with two politically independent levels of 1) Federal (Bund) and 2) State (Länder or Bundesländer), and has a highly differentiated decentralized system of Government and administration (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, 2021). The 16 states in Germany have their own government and legislations which means the federal authority has the responsibility of formulating policy, and the states are responsible for implementation (Franzke, 2020). The Federal Government supports the states in dealing with extraordinary danger and the Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) supports the states' operations with technology, expertise and other services (Federal Ministry of Interior, Building and Community, 2020). Due to the decentralized system of government, the Federal Government does not have the power to impose pandemic emergency measures. In the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, in order to slowdown the spread of coronavirus, on 16 March 2020 the federal and state governments attempted to harmonize joint guidelines, however one month later State governments started to act more independently (Franzke & Kuhlmann, 2021). In Germany, health insurance is compulsory and more than 11% of Germany’s GDP goes into healthcare spending (Federal Statistical Office, 2021). Health related policy at the federal level is the primary responsibility of the Federal Ministry of Health. This ministry supervises institutions dealing with higher level of public health including the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM), the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute (PEI), the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) and the Federal Centre for Health Education (Federal Ministry of Health, 2020). The first German National Pandemic Plan (NPP), published in 2005, comprises two parts. Part one, updated in 2017, provides a framework for the pandemic plans of the states and the implementation plans of the municipalities, and part two, updated in 2016, is the scientific part of the National Pandemic Plan (Robert Koch Institut, 2017). The joint Federal-State working group on pandemic planning was established in 2005. A pandemic plan for German citizens abroad was published by the German Foreign Office on its website in 2005 (Robert Koch Institut, 2017). In 2007, the federal and state Governments, under the joint leadership of the Federal Ministry of the Interior and the Federal Ministry of Health, simulated influenza pandemic exercise called LÜKEX 07, and trained cross-states and cross-department crisis management (Bundesanstalt Technisches Hilfswerk, 2007b). In 2017, within the context of the G20, Germany ran a health emergency simulation exercise with representatives from WHO and the World Bank to prepare for future pandemic events (Federal Ministry of Health et al., 2017). By the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, on 27 February 2020, a joint crisis team of the Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) and the Federal Ministry of Health (BMG) was established (Die Bundesregierung, 2020a). On 4 March 2020 RKI published a Supplement to the National Pandemic Plan for COVID-19 (Robert Koch Institut, 2020d), and on 28 March 2020, a law for the protection of the population in an epidemic situation of national scope (Infektionsschutzgesetz) came into force (Bundesgesundheitsministerium, 2020b). In the first early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Germany managed to slow down the speed of the outbreak but was less successful in dealing with the second phase. Coronavirus-related information and measures were communicated through various platforms including TV, radio, press conferences, federal and state government official homepages, social media and applications. In mid-March 2020, the federal and state governments implemented extensive measures nationwide for pandemic containment. Step by step, social distancing and shutdowns were enforced by all Federal States, involving closing schools, day-cares and kindergartens, pubs, restaurants, shops, prayer services, borders, and imposing a curfew. To support those affected financially by the pandemic, the German Government provided large economic packages (Bundesministerium der Finanzen, 2020). These measures have adopted to the COVID-19 situation and changed over the pandemic. On 22 April 2020, the clinical trial of the corona vaccine was approved by Paul Ehrlich Institute, and in late December 2020, the distribution of vaccination in Germany and all other EU countries