Its simple amazing.
1) No verification that the user trusts that particular bank to perform this service. Most banks just deployed BankID for all their customers.
2) No verification between bank and government ensuring that particular person can be represented by particular bank. In principle a bank could inpersonate a person even if that person have no legal relation with that bank.
3) Bank authentication is generally bad. Either login+SMS, or proprietary smartphone applications. No FIDO U2F or any token based systems.
Fortunately, there are also alternatives for identification to government services:
1) Government ID card with smartcard chip. But not everyone has a new version of ID card (old version does not have chip). It also requires separate hardware (smartcard reader) and some software middleware.
2) MojeID service (mojeid.cz) that uses FIDO U2F token.
Disclaimer: working for CZ.NIC org that also offers MojeID service.
Ad #3: FIDO is basically unusable for banking. It's designed for user authentication, not transaction signatures which banks need (and must do because of the PSD2 regulation).
But I do not see any such engagement from banks.
Transaction signatures are good if well implemented, but I'm not seeing a lot of good implementations. To be effective the user needs to understand what's going on so that they're appropriately suspicious when approached by crooks.
e.g. if I just know I had to enter 58430012 to send my niece $12, I don't end up learning why and when crooks persuade me to enter 58436500 I won't spot that this is actually authorising a $6500 transfer and I should be alarmed.