Lex-Atlas: Covid-19: A Comparative Study of National Legal Responses to COVID-19.
Lead Research Organisation:
University College London
Department Name: Laws
Abstract
Original application: 'The project's core deliverables are a Compendium, a Database and a Final Report by fourteen internationally distinguished scholars on the legal responses to Covid-19 in 80 countries across all regions of the world.
The Compendium comprises 80 national reports written by local legal experts on the relevant country's response to Covid-19, covering: (1) the constitutional/legal framework; (2) the functioning of institutions (e.g. legislatures, courts); (3) the core public health measures adopted; (4) the social and economic measures adopted; and (5) key legal measures in respect of civil liberties and vulnerable groups.
The Database collates determinate and quantifiable data on these themes, allowing users to conduct comprehensive cross-national comparisons and correlations with other known socio-economic, political and health data.
The Final Report will comprise:
1. an analytical overview of the data, identifying response trends and correlations to major socio-economic and health indicators; and
2. an in-depth critical analysis of various thematic areas (e.g. privacy, civil liberties, migration), proposing best and worst practices in relation to different themes as well as overall state performance.
The deliverables provide critical comparative data for the assessment of the UK's response to Covid-19 as well as for future pandemic preparedness, in general and with particular reference to several topics and questions identified as critical by UKRI: economic, gender and race inequalities; security and justice; national recovery and transformation; contact tracing; and national security and foreign policy. The project's dissemination plans include a clear and viable impact pathway into decision-making in the UK Parliament as well as in Whitehall.'
From the www.lexatlas-c19.org website, more media friendly:
"The Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 (LAC19) project was launched in the fall 2020 and will provide a scholarly analysis of national legal responses to Covid-19 around the world. Updated across 2021, it will be published open-access by Oxford University Press. It is the product of a vast collaboration of legal experts from across the world, led by University College London, King's College London, the Max Planck Institute of Comparative Public Law and generously supported by the UK's Arts and Humanities Research Council.
The project is motivated by the need for a comprehensive overview of national legal responses to Covid-19. The pandemic has many facets, and national responses have varied considerably. Quite apart from epidemiological performance, countries have employed emergency powers differently, have had different kinds of institutional disruption, diverged in public health measures, and have had variable social policy coverage and responses to the human rights needs of vulnerable groups. A scholarly overview of these legal responses is required both to assess past political choices and to prepare for future pandemics. Cataloguing them in detail will also be an important contribution to the history of the pandemic. However, the complexity and fluid nature of the subject-matter essentially requires an unconventional scholarly approach. To make the international comparisons valuable, it requires a high degree of coordination between distinguished national legal experts, a large editorial team applying a consistent methodology, and the capacity to change national portraits as the law and policy shifts in line with the evolution of the pandemic.
The project seeks to meet this need through a world-wide collaboration between legal scholars. The project's core deliverables include a Compendium of Country Reports, a Database, and a Final Report covering best and worst practices in the views of the project's Editorial Committee. All deliverables will be open-access and data will be held open-source. The project portal and further details are available at www.lexatlas-c19.org."
The Compendium comprises 80 national reports written by local legal experts on the relevant country's response to Covid-19, covering: (1) the constitutional/legal framework; (2) the functioning of institutions (e.g. legislatures, courts); (3) the core public health measures adopted; (4) the social and economic measures adopted; and (5) key legal measures in respect of civil liberties and vulnerable groups.
The Database collates determinate and quantifiable data on these themes, allowing users to conduct comprehensive cross-national comparisons and correlations with other known socio-economic, political and health data.
The Final Report will comprise:
1. an analytical overview of the data, identifying response trends and correlations to major socio-economic and health indicators; and
2. an in-depth critical analysis of various thematic areas (e.g. privacy, civil liberties, migration), proposing best and worst practices in relation to different themes as well as overall state performance.
The deliverables provide critical comparative data for the assessment of the UK's response to Covid-19 as well as for future pandemic preparedness, in general and with particular reference to several topics and questions identified as critical by UKRI: economic, gender and race inequalities; security and justice; national recovery and transformation; contact tracing; and national security and foreign policy. The project's dissemination plans include a clear and viable impact pathway into decision-making in the UK Parliament as well as in Whitehall.'
From the www.lexatlas-c19.org website, more media friendly:
"The Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 (LAC19) project was launched in the fall 2020 and will provide a scholarly analysis of national legal responses to Covid-19 around the world. Updated across 2021, it will be published open-access by Oxford University Press. It is the product of a vast collaboration of legal experts from across the world, led by University College London, King's College London, the Max Planck Institute of Comparative Public Law and generously supported by the UK's Arts and Humanities Research Council.
The project is motivated by the need for a comprehensive overview of national legal responses to Covid-19. The pandemic has many facets, and national responses have varied considerably. Quite apart from epidemiological performance, countries have employed emergency powers differently, have had different kinds of institutional disruption, diverged in public health measures, and have had variable social policy coverage and responses to the human rights needs of vulnerable groups. A scholarly overview of these legal responses is required both to assess past political choices and to prepare for future pandemics. Cataloguing them in detail will also be an important contribution to the history of the pandemic. However, the complexity and fluid nature of the subject-matter essentially requires an unconventional scholarly approach. To make the international comparisons valuable, it requires a high degree of coordination between distinguished national legal experts, a large editorial team applying a consistent methodology, and the capacity to change national portraits as the law and policy shifts in line with the evolution of the pandemic.
The project seeks to meet this need through a world-wide collaboration between legal scholars. The project's core deliverables include a Compendium of Country Reports, a Database, and a Final Report covering best and worst practices in the views of the project's Editorial Committee. All deliverables will be open-access and data will be held open-source. The project portal and further details are available at www.lexatlas-c19.org."
Publications
Zhiqiong June W
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Zemelak A A
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Yoon Jin Shin, Joo-Young Lee, Jehyung Jeong, Chae Wan Suh
(2024)
The Oxford Compendium of National legal Responses to Covid-19
Yoon Jin S
(2023)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Villarreal P
(2021)
Pandemic: Building a Legal Concept for the Future
in SSRN Electronic Journal
Villareal P
(2022)
Ciencias y pandemia: Una epistemología para los derechos humanos
VILLAREAL P
(2021)
COVID-19 and Police Powers Beyond the State
Tatiana K
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Stephen T
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Stefano Civitarese M
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Solvita O
(2022)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Serkan K
(2022)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
ROCHI MONAGAS M
(2021)
Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Prof Dr Karl S
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Petronell K
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Pedro A V
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Patricio López Turconi, Alejandro Gallotti, Oscar A. Cabrera
(2023)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Octávio Luiz Motta F
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Magdalena R
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Lindsay F W
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Linda Yanti S
(2022)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
KING J
(2021)
Blog Symposium on Mandatory Vaccination
KING J
(2021)
UK publishes route out of third lockdown
King J
(2023)
Comparing Covid-19 Laws. Forthcoming
King J
(2022)
Mandatory COVID-19 vaccination and human rights.
in Lancet (London, England)
Khemthong T
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Jaclyn N
(2022)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Isaam Bin H
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Guillermo J
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Gabrielle E
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Fruzsina G
(2022)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
FERRAZ O
(2021)
Crime and (lack of) Punishment in Brazil's Pandemic Response
Ferraz O
(2021)
Covid-19 and Inequality: The Importance of Social Rights
in King's Law Journal
Estelle C
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
| Description | As a result of the funding awarded to the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 (LAC19) project, we have produced the Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19. Authored by more than 200 distinguished national legal scholars and edited by an Editorial Committee composed of internationally recognised experts, the Compendium is a resource that provides a neutral, highly detailed, high-quality account of government responses to the pandemic. The Compendium currently contains 43 published entries. All of those 43 entries cover Parts I-IV, and 21 entries cover also Parts V-VI of the six-part Author Guidance Code. These entries are on average well over 20,000 words, in some cases over 30,000 words, due in most cases to the complexity of the legal response to the more protracted course of the pandemic than originally envisaged. Some new entries (including India, Japan, Kazakhstan, Poland, Malaysia, and Nigeria) are being processed by the editorial team and will be published soon, bringing the number of Compendium entries to at least 49. The open-access format allows the general public, alongside lawyers, academics, and policymakers, to access the resource free of charge. All country reports in the Compendium follow the same format and respond to the same questions included in a published Author Guidance Code that allows the reader to easily compare different countries' responses to Covid-19 in areas including public health measures, social and economic measures, institutional oversight, impact on vulnerable groups human rights. Due to our instructions in the author guidance, all references in the Oxford Compendium contain a hyperlink to the original legal source in its original legal form (and these sources are archived). It is therefore considered to be a highly valuable historical resource for comparative legal history work. We also produced three datasets (on Emergency Powers; Parliaments; and Federalism) that provide a wealth of quantitative data on specific aspects of countries' responses to the pandemic (for instance use of emergency powers, federalism, access to courts, etc). Each dataset is posted on the Lex Atlas website, data section. In open access format, each dataset is accompanied by graphs, charts, and tables for the public to use freely. Thanks to the data mining and coding by the team, it is also possible for the members of the public to produce their own charts, graphs, and carry out their own analysis of relevant data from these datasets (which are all open-source). We have also launched the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 blog, which complements the Compendium by providing insights and analyses of national contexts and court cases as well as updates on countries' situations in-between the publication of the Compendium's updates. The ongoing exchange between the different members of the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 network and the team have resulted in the production of symposia on various topics such as mandatory vaccination, as well as a document highlighting the legal, ethical, and constitutional principles on mandatory vaccination (the 'Principles'). This document is the result of a carefully balanced drafting that reflects the views of various legal experts with very diverse backgrounds. A final achievement is the creation of a vast international legal network, for which we have identified new projects. There is interest from three law journals, two of which are agreed in principle, to host special issues on certain legal themes taking submissions from jurists across the countries in the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 network. These special issues has of yet not been carried forward as the team's focus is on producing Comparing Covid Laws: A Global Critical Overview (OUP 2024). The insights revealed by this global collaboration thus far include the following. First, most countries did not rely on constitutional emergency powers to respond to the pandemic. They used public health legislation or introduced new public health legislation, that is, emergency powers of a statutory kind. Countries did not move to a state of exception, as a rule. Second, most domestic institutions such as parliaments, courts, and public agencies proved resilient in countries where they had been resilient previously. This was the case for consolidated democracies, though countries that had authoritarian tendencies prior to the pandemic exploited the situation to consolidate power. Across the whole study, national elections were postponed briefly in a minority of cases and in most cases parliaemnts continued to meet - and in advanced democracies adapted swiftly to the demands of the pandemic. While judicial deference was common - and quite often in line with previous jurisprudence on crises and public health responses - the courts remained open in nearly all countries and bills of rights were suspended in a small minority of states in the study. New legislation, furthermore, tended to include provisions for automatic expiry (sunset provisions) both of new primary legislation (statutes) and for public health regulations adopted by ministers. On the whole, widespread worries about executive aggrandizement were not borne out as a rule in most countries, and examples of 'executive underreach' were at least as commonly observed. Third, there was no evident correlation between countries that maintained a certain legal and political status quo ante and evidence of poor pandemic performance, if we take excess deaths as the measure. While causal relationships between democratic performance and effective transmission control cannot be drawn, it can be shown that advanced democracies that kept their institutions running not only had widely varying levels of performance in managing Covid-19, often effective, but also that states with poor records (e.g. Russia, Peru) or with chronic democratic deficits (e.g. India, Mexico) had outsized excess death figures. Statistically speaking, there is no significant relationship between excess deaths and either democratic performance, respect for civil liberties or for the rule of law. These insights as well as much more thematically specific interventions in all the main areas covered in the country reports will be published open access in J King & O Ferraz (eds), Comparing Covid Laws: A Critical Global Overview, whose contract is agreed with Oxford University Press and which will publish (in 2024) papers that have been authored by the editorial committee and workshopped twice in London. The book will also contain more nuanced observations and recommendations about models for emergency powers statutes. The chapters focuses on a diverse range of topics, of interest to several disciplinary audiences and policy communities: federalism and local responses; public health impact of legal responses; right to protest; litigation and role of Courts; privacy and data; international health law and policy; employment protection; autocratic responses and democratic decline; gendered impact. The book will be the publication of what is in effect the 'Final Report' of the project, namely, providing a comparative, critical assessment of national legal responses to Covid-19 on each of their areas of expertise (including emergency powers, federalism, authoritarianism, access to courts, and human rights litigation). This assessment will include best and worst practices, and will rely on both the Compendium and the datasets to provide case studies and examples to the reader. The book will critically evaluate responses to the current pandemics enabling accountability and suggesting which avenues and principles could be useful in the context of future pandemics or public health emergencies. |
| Exploitation Route | All project outputs are published on an open-access basis, including the Oxford Compendium, the datasets, and the Final Report (i.e. the Comparing Covid Laws volume). The outputs have already begun to provide academics, lawyers, policymakers and the general public with a wealth of data and analyses of how different countries responded to the pandemic with regard to a large number of specific issues (i.e. what public health measures were adopted, different ways of implementing similar measures, institutional behavior and performance, impact on human rights and the rule of law, social and economic measures adopted, etc). As well as the analyses carried out and published by members of the project, users will be able to access the raw data free of charge and make comparisons on relevant topics. As a concrete example, the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 team provided crucial secretariat support to the Independent Commission on UK Public Health Emergency Powers (Chaired by the Right Honourable Sir Jack Beatson FBA), hosted by the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law (located at the British Institute for International and Comparative Law). The 'Beatson Commission' was in dialogue with both the Scottish Covid-19 Inquiry and the UK national inquiry into the response to Covid-19 (the 'Hallett Inquiry'). The evidence sessions held by the Beatson Commission on international comparisons were supported on a documentary level by the Oxford Compendium reports, which formed the basic substance of the Commissioners' pre-briefings. About 80% of the experts giving evidence to the Commission were country rapporteurs in the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 project. The Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 PI Jeff King was also appointed to sit as a Commissioner in this group, and played a key strategic as well as informational role in shaping the Commission's work and originating and refining some of its key recommendations. The Beatson Commission steering group has communicated to the Hallett Inquiry and Scottish inquiry that information on comparative law and constitutional matters can be drawn directly by them from this UKRI-funded LAC19 project. There are also many potential contributions to scholarship resulting from the creation of the LAC19 network. As discussed above, the possibility of producing special issues on key themes is a legacy opportunity that will be examined and decided upon in the coming year, after the primary outputs of the project are finalised. The Final Report (the Comparing Covid Laws volume) - composed of chapters authored by each of our Editorial Committee members on their area of expertise - can be used by not only academics, but also students, the general public, and policymakers as an expert and methodologically sound basis on which to rely when designing legal and constitutional solutions to future pandemics or public health emergencies. |
| Sectors | Communities and Social Services/Policy Education Healthcare Government Democracy and Justice Other |
| URL | https://lexatlas-c19.org |
| Description | Apart from by academics, the Compendium and datasets have been used by those advising policymakers and the general public. As the resource is open-access, it is difficult to assess the exact impact beyond academia, but Oxford University Press' statistics indicate that there has been a significant stream of visits to the Oxford Compendium's website. In 2022 alone, OUP reports to us that there have been 20,966 page views of individual compendium report pages, a substantial number of which we expect to be from non-academic audiences. Beyond this, there have been other public engagements by team members. For example, Co-PI Jeff King gave oral evidence to the Public and Constitutional Affairs Committee of the House of Commons in 2021, which resulted in him being quoted several times in the resulting report 'The Coronavirus Act 2020: Two Years On'. Co-PI Octavio Ferraz gave talks presenting the research findings at Harvard Law School, the ICON S Society of Public Law, and . In 2022, Co-PI Jeff King delivered a lecture at the annual Administrative Law Bar Association annual conference in July 2022, which was attended by over 100 public law barristers. He also gave a talk at the Chatham House of London, in panel discussion "Protection of Human Rights During Crises" to an audience of approximately 100 people, primarily academics, legal practitioners and civil society. In 2023, he shared the research findings in an international workshop on the effect of Covid-19 on the functioning of Parliaments with approximately 20 attendees at the University of Bar Ilan, Israel; delivered a talk at the Winter/Summer school of the IconS Society of Public Law for junior scholars and the Comparative Constitutional Studies Conference, hosted by UNSW Gilbert +Tobin Centre of Public Law and NUS CALS in June in Sidney, Australia. Finally, in January 2024 Jeff delivered a talk at the Georgetown Law Center for Transnational Legal Studies in London with an audience of about 70 people, open to experts and to the general public. Co-PI Jeff King also gave three interviews to popular media outlets - Al Jazeera, UCL Portico Magazine, and a podcast hosted by a broadcaster for UCL Health of the Public. The interviews aimed at a general public audience and were focused on the constitutional implications of the UK's response to Covid-19, and on the compatibility of Covid-19 vaccine mandates with human rights law standards. Upon showing the results of the Lex-Atlas constitutional and legal principles relating to the use of mandatory vaccination, we were invited by the Editor of the Lancet, Richard Horton, to contribute a comment piece on the subject of Mandatory Vaccination and Human Rights, which was cited 39 times (according to Google scholar) and was widely read by the public with over 100 reads and 30,609 shares, likes and comments on social media. 11 of our country reports were been cited at: Chiro, M (2023). Parliamentary oversight of governments' response to the COVID-19 pandemic: Literature review. European Parliamentary Research Service. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2023/740217/EPRS_STU(2023)740217_EN.pdf Co-PI Jeff King was appointed Commissioner within the 'Independent Commission on UK Public Health Emergency Powers', chaired by The Rt. Hon. Sir Jack Beatson FBA. This Commission launched in October 2022, and worked throughout 2023 and early 2024 in collaboration with the UK Covid-19 Inquiry led by Baroness Hallett and the Scottish Covid-19 Inquiry led by Lord Brailsford. The Bingham Center for the Rule of Law provides the Commission's Secretariat. The Commission brings together leading policy experts, practitioners in the field, parliamentarians, and academics conducting research on the use of public power during public health emergencies. Its goal is to review the UK's public health legislative framework and institutional arrangements, alongside Government decision-making during the Covid-19 pandemic. It considers how far current legal frameworks and parliamentary procedures protect the Rule of Law and human rights, and how far they promote accountability, transparency, and parliamentary control of executive action. Information on the Commission is available here: https://binghamcentre.biicl.org/independent-commission-on-uk-public-health-emergency-powers. Data from Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 reports was collated and presented to the Independent Commission. In February 2024, the Commission has completed evidence-taking and is currently finalizing its report. Interim briefings have been well received by the UK and Scottish Covid-19 Inquiries, and the Commission has had productive meetings with health officials from the UK, Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Ireland administrations. The Commission will be making proposals for law and policy reform in a report due to be published in early 2024. The latest update on the Commission's work is available here: https://mailchi.mp/9f24d74be5a4/bingham-centre-for-the-rule-of-law-weekly-update-1351785. Furthermore, and as per the initial grant application, events have been coordinated with both the House of Commons Library and with the Institute for Government to launch sessions demonstrating the data and findings from the project. These events, unfortunately, were fully planned to be held in early September 2022 but by common agreement were postponed on the death of the Queen, which occurred only two weeks before the events were to be held. These were planned to be held in the autumn of 2023, in line with delays in the Hallett Inquiry getting underway and the fact that it is due to consider the international comparisons component of the inquiry in the autumn of 2023. The team and wider network have also received invitations from academic institutions and policymakers (both at the national and international level, such as the EU) to discuss the reports and their findings. For instance, the two Co-Principal Investigators were invited by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control to discuss the Principles of Mandatory Vaccination in March 2022. |
| Sector | Healthcare,Government, Democracy and Justice,Pharmaceuticals and Medical Biotechnology |
| Impact Types | Policy & public services |
| Description | Contribution to the work of the Independent Commission on UK Public Health Emergency Powers |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| Impact | In February 2024, the Commission has completed evidence-taking and is currently finalizing its report. Interim briefings have been well received by the UK and Scottish Covid-19 Inquiries, and the Commission has had productive meetings with health officials from the UK, Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Ireland administrations. The Commission will be making proposals for law and policy reform in a report due to be published in early 2024. The input provided by the Lex Atlas research informed the work of the Commission and this will be reflected in the final report. |
| Description | Gave evidence to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) (Commons Select Committee) |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| Description | Lex Atlas Co-PI appointed as Commissioner within the 'Independent Commission on UK Public Health Emergency Powers' |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
| Impact | The Commission worked in collaboration with the UK Covid-19 Inquiry led by Baroness Hallett and the Scottish Covid-19 Inquiry led by Lord Brailsford. |
| URL | https://binghamcentre.biicl.org/independent-commission-on-uk-public-health-emergency-powers |
| Description | Oral evidence presented by 10 Country Rapporteurs for the Oxford Compendium on National Legal Responses to Covid 10 to the 'Independent Commission on UK Public Health Emergency Powers' |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| Impact | In February 2024, the Commission has completed evidence-taking and is currently finalizing its report. Interim briefings have been well received by the UK and Scottish COVID-19 inquiries, and the Commission has had productive meetings with health officials from the UK, Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Ireland administrations. The Commission will be making proposals for law and policy reform in a report due to be published in early 2024. The report will contain references to input provided by the experts. |
| Description | Quotation in Report of the Political and Constitutional Affairs Committee Report, Seventh Report of Session 2021-22, Coronavirus Act 2020 Two Years On, HC 978. |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| Impact | My evidence fed into the recommendations of the Committee for how the Coronavirus Act 2020 could be reviewed and how future legislation could be planned. |
| Title | Codebook for Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 Data |
| Description | Codebook for variables in clued in the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 Emergency Powers and Parliaments datasets. More information can be found at https://lexatlas-c19.org |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | This codebook allows users and researchers to peruse the variables included in the two already published datasets (emergency powers and parliaments). |
| URL | https://zenodo.org/record/6363142 |
| Title | Lex Atlas Covid-19, Federalism Dataset |
| Description | In this dataset, we focus specifically on how Federal countries responded to the Covid-19 pandemic. We coded data manually from the Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19, one of the two main output of the Lex Atlas Project. We also conducted a survey among Country Rapporteurs to confirm data consistency as emerging from manual coding and to gather additional qualitative information. In the first section, we hand-coded both Constitutional and Legal frameworks, and how they interplayed between national and subnational jurisdictions. The topics covered in this section include: Constitutional and International Law, Statutory Emergency, Executive Rule-Making Power, and Guidance. In the second section, we hand-coded issues related to Institutions and Oversight. The Role of Legislatures (and the functioning of subnational legislatures), Courts, Elections, Public Health Measures, and Enforcement are covered. In the third section, we look into Social Protection measures. We cover a range of topics, including Social Assistance and Insurance, Tax Relief, Employment Protection, and Human Rights and Vulnerable Groups. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2023 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | The dataset allows the general public to gain a comparative overview of the legal responses to the pandemic in Federal and quasi federal systems worldwide, in a total of 18 Countries: Argentina Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Ethiopia, The European Union, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia, South Africa, Spain, United Kingdom, United States, Malaysia, Venezuela. This open-source dataset will allow researchers to manipulate the data as convenient, to produce graphs and charts or to create their own datasets. The dataset version was last updated in September 2023, the law to which the entries refer to is updated to 2021 or 2022. |
| URL | https://lexatlas-c19.org/federalism-data/ |
| Title | Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 - Author Guidance Code |
| Description | this is the codebook according to which authors composed the country reports. Editors supervised the compliance with the AGC and it resulted in a set of reports which were comparable for data-mining purposes. |
| Type Of Material | Data analysis technique |
| Year Produced | 2021 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | N/A |
| URL | https://oxcon.ouplaw.com/fileasset/Author%20Guidance%20Code%20OCC19.pdf |
| Title | Lex-Atlas:Covid-19 Emergency Powers Dataset |
| Description | Data on the use of emergency powers used to handle the Covid-19 pandemic mined from country reports published by the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 project and the Oxford University Press. For more information see https://lexatlas-c19.org The dataset is updated until mid 2022. We are currently extending and editing the dataset. We will make the revised version available in 2023. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | The dataset allows the general public to gain a comparative overview of the use of emergency powers during the pandemic in 38 countries. This open-source dataset will allow researchers to manipulate the data as convenient, to produce graphs and charts or to create their own datasets. |
| URL | https://zenodo.org/records/6907305 |
| Title | Lex-Atlas:Covid-19 Parliaments Dataset |
| Description | Data on the impact on national parliaments resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic mined from country reports published by the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 project and the Oxford University Press. For more information see https://lexatlas-c19.org |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | The dataset allows the general public to gain a comparative overview of the use of emergency powers during the pandemic in 38 countries. This open-source dataset will allow researchers to manipulate the data as convenient, to produce graphs and charts or to create their own datasets. The dataset is updated until mid 2022. We are currently extending and editing the dataset. We will make the revised version available in 2023. |
| URL | https://zenodo.org/record/6363125 |
| Title | Quantitative data analysis techniques |
| Description | Two datasets have been published on emergency powers used during the pandemic and the impact on parliaments of Covid-19. These data contain binary and categorical variables mined from the qualitative reports and links to the specific section of the reports from which piece of information was mined. Logistic and linear regression modelling of the data has been conducted by linking external datasets (e.g. measure of authoritarianism, adherence to rule of law, inequality scores, etc). |
| Type Of Material | Data analysis technique |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | The coding of quantitative data from the qualitative reports has allowed for more extensive and analytical cross-country comparison. Regression modelling of the data, alongside external datasets detailing system type and other political and social variables, has shown a relationship between political and legal freedoms and objectively better outcomes (e.g. lower excess deaths, shorter parliamentary closures, less pandemic opportunism, etc). |
| URL | https://zenodo.org/communities/lexatlas-c19/search?page=1&size=20 |
| Description | Partnership with the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law |
| Organisation | Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law |
| Country | Germany |
| Sector | Public |
| PI Contribution | The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19 is made available open-access by the Faculty of Laws, University College London; the Dickson Poon School of Law, King's College London; and the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19 is made available open-access by the Faculty of Laws, University College London; the Dickson Poon School of Law, King's College London; and the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law. |
| Impact | Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19 |
| Start Year | 2021 |
| Description | Interview for UCL Portico Magazine |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | In this article, Jeff King considered ideas of liberty in light of his work mapping legal responses to Covid-19 around the world |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
| URL | https://uclporticomagazine.co.uk/spotlights-and-ideas/jeremy-bentham-speaks-law/ |
| Description | Jeff King as Commissioner for Independent Commission on UK Public Health Emergency Powers |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Principal Investigator Prof Jeff King took up a role as Commissioner in the Independent Commission on UK Public Health Emergency Powers led by Sir Jack Beatson. This Commission is working in collaboration with the UK Covid-19 Inquiry led by Baroness Hallett and the Scottish Covid-19 Inquiry led by Lord Brailsford. Report expected October 2023. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |
| URL | https://binghamcentre.biicl.org/independent-commission-on-uk-public-health-emergency-powers |
| Description | Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 Blog / Website and Twitter account |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Engagement focused website, blog or social media channel |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | The Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 website was launched to provide a space for blog posts, symposia, datasets and policy briefs, and documents with very specific scopes. Country Rapporteurs have kindly contributed blog posts to the website, providing the readers with legal analyses of court cases or specific public health measures, or more generally with updates regarding the country's situation. It enriches the Compendium because it reflects the authors' views and critical assessment of the situation. In addition to these blog posts, the team has been able to publish symposia, written jointly by Editorial Committee members and the Country Rapporteurs, on specific areas of concerns. Other documents, such as our Legal, Constitutional and Ethical Principles on Mandatory Vaccination have also been published there. Finally, the website currently hosts datasets on chosen topics, alongside graphs, charts and policy briefs, available for the general public to use. Our Twitter account has also allowed us to further publicise the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 project and engage with a wider audience. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
| URL | https://lexatlas-c19.org/ |
| Description | Media Interview on Al Jazeera Newshour about mandatory vaccination in Europe |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | On 11 January 2022, Political Science Research Fellow Andrew Jones was interviewed by Al Jazeera NewsHour to speak about the announcement of mandatory vaccination schemes in Austria, Germany and Italy. He was asked whether they infringed people's rights. He outlined the Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 Principles on Mandatory Vaccination and stated that schemes should be based in primary law which has undergone a proper consultation and that countries are free to develop proportional systems that best suit their citizens. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| Description | Podcast: Coronavirus: The Whole Story (Jeff King). This was a podcast hosted by the broadcaster Vivienne Parry for UCL Health of the Public, interviewing Jeff King and Meg Russell about the constitutional implications of the UK's response to Covid-19. |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A broadcast e.g. TV/radio/film/podcast (other than news/press) |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | This podcast is broadcast nationally and has many listeners (precise numbers unknown). |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| URL | https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ucl-minds/podcasts/coronavirus/transcript-episode-47 |
| Description | Talk by Jeff King at Administrative Law Bar Association (ALBA) Summer Conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Speech and panel discussion by Prof Jeff King on the topic "Accountability for Coronavirus Regulations in the UK Parliament" on 2 July 2022. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| URL | https://adminlaw.org.uk/event/alba-summer-conference-2022/ |
| Description | Talk by Jeff King at Chatham House London Conference of International Law |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Speech and participation by Jeff King in panel discussion on "Protection of Human Rights During Crises" on 11 October 2022, to an audience of approximately 100 people, primarily academics, legal practitioners and civil society. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| URL | http://thelondonconference.org/programme/ |
| Description | Talk by Jeff King at Transnational Law Colloquium, Center for Transnational Legal Studies, Georgetown Law. London, United Kingdom |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | On January 18, 2024 Co-PI Jeff King gave a talk on 'Law, Rights, and Democracy during the Covid-19 Pandemic: A Global Study', at the Transnational Law Colloquium organized by the Center for Transnational Legal Studies London, Georgetown University Law. Jeff King presented some of the key findings of the comparative research conducted within the Lex Atlas project. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2024 |
| URL | https://www.law.georgetown.edu/ctls/wp-content/uploads/sites/33/2024/02/Spring-2024-Colloquium-Sched... |
| Description | Talk by Jeff king at Comparative Constitutional Studies Conference and Winter School for Junior Scholars at ICON-S International Society of Public Law, Gilbert and Tobin Centre of Public Law at UNSW. Sidney, Australia. |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Postgraduate students |
| Results and Impact | On June 28, 2023 Co-PI Jeff King presented the findings of the comparative research on emergency powers and the rule of law implication conducted within the Lex Atlas project at the Comparative Constitutional Studies Conference hosted by the UNSW Gilbert +Tobin Centre of Public Law and the Center for Asian Legal Studies at Central University of Sindapore. The presentation took place within the panel 'Public Law in the Age of COVID'. The conference audience included graduate students, early career researchers, scholars attending the Winter/Summer School of the ICON S society of public law. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |
| Description | Talk by Octavio Ferraz at Christen Michelsen Institute, University of Bergen, Norway |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Talk by Octavio Ferraz on < |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
| Description | Talk by Octavio Ferraz at Harvard Law School |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Talk by Octavio Ferraz on "COVID-19 in Brazil: Institutional Meltdown in the Middle of a Pandemic" in Symposium on "Responses to Covid-19: Democracy, Rights and the Law" 17 September 2020 at Harvard Law School to approximately 100 people. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
| URL | https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/symposia/global-responses-covid19-rights-democracy-law/ |
| Description | Talk by Octavio Ferraz at ICON-S International Society of Public Law |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Talk by Octavio Ferraz on "Doing Comparative Constitutional Law in Pandemics: Insights from Lex-Atlas: Covid-19" on 21 July 2021 to approximately 30 people. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
| Description | Talks by Jeff King, Michael Veale, Pedro Villarreal, Tamara Hervey, and Bryan Thomas at Borders, Boundaries, Pandemics Conference, University of Ottawa, Canada |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Jeff King was invited to discuss the Covid-19 vaccination passports. His talk was entitled "Mobility restrictions, human rights, and epidemiological efficacy". In the same Conference, Pedro Villarreal (Cross-border mobility of persons and goods during pandemics: Vaccine passports and normative duality in international law), Michael Veale (Verification theatre at borders and in pockets), Tamara Hervey (Management of the European Union's (internal and external) borders) and Bryan Thomas (Human rights implications of vaccine passports) presented their works. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| URL | https://www.ottawahealthlaw.ca/borders |
| Description | Talks by Jeff King, Nico Steytler, Elena De Nictolis at webinar with academics and local policy makers / civil servants from European Union municipalities |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Co-PI Jeff King and members of the editorial committee Nico Steytler and Elena De Nictolis participated to the webinar 'Federalism, proportionality and subsidiarity in Covid-19 times: Are there any advantages compared to unitary states? - Case studies from local government' organized by Professor Yseult Marique of Essex Law School on June 30, 202. Nico Steytler co-organized the webinar and presented the result of the work of comparative analysis of Federal Country Reports of the Lex Atlas Compendium, with a focus on the role of local governments; Elena De Nictolis presented the result of her work of comparative analysis of cities within Unitary and Federal Country Reports of the Lex Atlas Compendium; Co-PI Jeff King concluded with reflections on the role of the State. The webinar was aimed at providing inputs for local policy makers (two panelists were policy makers from the municipalities of Antwerp (the Netherlands) and Mannheim (Germany) on what other cities did to counteract Covid-19. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| Description | Workshop participation by Jeff King at Bar-Ilan University, Israel |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Participation by Jeff King in an international workshop on the effect of Covid-19 on the functioning of Parliaments with approximately 20 attendees. Topic of talk: "Suspension, reductions and consensus: a cross-country analysis of 39 parliaments during the Covid-19 pandemic". |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |