[New blog post] Slovakia’s forced labour law for doctors
Published 10 April 2025
Image generated by ChatGPT
In their new blog post on Human Rights Here, Hendrik Mathis Drößler (Asser Institute) and Richard Patassy discuss the legal implications of a controversial new law in Slovakia. This new law compels doctors to continue working during emergencies, raising concerns about forced labour and human rights violations.
Slovakia’s healthcare system is at a breaking point. Chronic underfunding, staff shortages, and poor working conditions have led many doctors to resign in protest. Instead of addressing these systemic issues, the Slovak government enacted an emergency law on 8 December 2024, forcing doctors in twelve of the most affected regions to continue working even after resigning.
This law allows the government to declare a healthcare emergency, preventing resignations for up to 120 days. Noncompliance carries severe penalties, including up to five years in prison if a patient is harmed due to a doctor’s absence.
Doctors’ unions, human rights organisations, and opposition politicians have strongly criticised the legislation, arguing that it attempts to conceal years of neglect in Slovakia’s healthcare system rather than implementing meaningful reforms.
Forced labour
Drößler and Patassy argue that by denying doctors the right to resign, the law risks violating Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which prohibits forced labour. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) define forced labour as work performed under threat of punishment and without voluntary consent. Although emergency exceptions exist under Article 4(3) ECHR, they must be necessary and proportionate.
Given Slovakia’s longstanding failure to implement meaningful healthcare reforms, combined with the severe penalties imposed on doctors, the law appears neither justified nor balanced. Instead of addressing systemic issues, it forces an already overburdened workforce to bear the consequences of political inaction.
Following negotiations, the government agreed on 12 February 2025 to withdraw the emergency measure and improve transparency in hospital funding and doctor remuneration. While this marks progress, Drößler and Patassy caution that without real structural reform, Slovakia’s healthcare system remains at risk of further crises and legal challenges.
Read the full blog post.
Hendrik Mathis Drößler holds a LL.M. in Public International Law from the University of Groningen (cum laude) and a double bachelor's degree in law and political science from Georg-August University Göttingen. His research interests center on the broader themes of the rule of law, with a particular emphasis on compliance with the International Court of Justice and the law of armed conflict.
Read more
[Blog post] Should mandatory human rights due diligence be based on social expectations?
On the tenth anniversary of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), Asser Institute researcher Antonio Guzmán Mutis examines the definition basis of corporate responsibility in a new blog post. Should corporate responsibility continue to rely on industry expectations, or should mandatory due diligence laws be rooted in human rights justifications? Read more.
