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
Emmanuel S
(2021)
The Oxford Compendium of National Legal Responses to Covid-19
Estelle C
(2021)
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
Fruzsina G
(2022)
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 in approximately 60 countries. 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 are also producing datasets (some of which are already completed: two are available online, others are in the making, and all being updated) 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 will eventually be 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 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. The first such collaboration will concern the normalisation of what were initially introduced as temporary legal innovations taken in emergency times. The network is uniquely well placed, both geographically and because of prior work, to comment on this phenomenon. 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 correllation 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 contained more nuanced observationsa nd recommendations about models for emergency powers statutes. 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 behaviour 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 their own 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' is 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. The Lex-Atlas: Covid-19 PI Jeff King was also appointed to sit as a Commissioner in this group. 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. Members of the LAC19 team intend to submit to the Hallett Inquiry this autumn, at which point that Inquiry will commence consideration of international comparisons. There are also many potential contributions to scholarship resulting from the creation of the LAC19 network. The core team has begun formalising the post-project legal network and we have arranged three special issues of journals who wish to host comparative content on specific issues arising from the project. For example, the Hague Journal for the Rule of Law has agreed to host a special issue on the topic of the normalisation of pandemic powers, with contributions from up to 20 different countries. The Austrlian Federal Law Review (whose editor is a country rapporteur) wishes to host a special issue on up to eight countries. We are in discussions with the European Human Rights Law Review to a similar end, focusing on European countries. Furthermore, the Co-PI Jeff King is coordinating with colleagues at the Humboldt University of Berlin to submit a joint DFG/AHRC application for an extended project on a theme that drew directly out of the LAC19 project. It is also possible to browse through our blog to access blog posts on chosen issues or countries written by distinguished national legal experts - whereas the Compendium is neutrally written, blog posts include the critical views of the author and therefore provide the reader with the legal analysis related to a case, a policy, etc. 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 academics, the Compendium and datasets have been used by 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 the last year 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 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. 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 25 times in the first year of its publication and was widely read by the public. 11 of our country reports have 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 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 are most likekly to be held in the autumn 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 2023. The team and wider network has 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 on Mandatory Vaccination in March 2022. As this project is in its final year there will be more to report in the final report. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2021 |
| Sector | Healthcare,Government, Democracy and Justice,Pharmaceuticals and Medical Biotechnology |
| Impact Types | Policy & public services |
| 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 | 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 - 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/record/6363096 |
| 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 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 | 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 |