Ethik und Corona: Normative Grenzen politischer Maßnahmen zur Eindämmung der Covid-19-Pandemie

Around the globe, drastic measures have been implemented in order to contain the Covid-19 pandemic. Ultimately, their justification is an ethical one: the duty to save human lives. But while individual policies are intensely discussed, an analysis of the discourse from a meta-perspective remains a desideratum. This paper seeks to contribute to such an analysis. It shows that structurally, the discussion is engaged in a risk-benefit-analysis. Within this analysis the fact that the containment policy itself causes deaths is insufficiently taken into account. In paralleling the current situation with the trolley problem and a ruling of the German Constitutional Court concerning the Luftsicherheitsgesetz (Aviation Security Act), the paper argues that the pandemic presents politicians with the choice to either not prevent the death of some, or sacrifice the lives of others in order to save them. As the latter is ethically dubious and unconstitutional, some of the policies already implemented need to be reevaluated. However, the argument does not imply that any action to mitigate the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic is illegitimate. Thus, the paper closes by examining the ethical conditions for political action in this case.