Undermining loyalty to legality? An empirical analysis of perceptions of 'lockdown' law and guidance during COVID-19

Tools

Finch, Naomi and Halliday, Simon and Tomlinson, Joe and Meers, Jed and Wilberforce, Mark (2022) Undermining loyalty to legality? An empirical analysis of perceptions of 'lockdown' law and guidance during COVID-19. Modern Law Review, 85 (6). pp. 1419-1439. ISSN 1468-2230 (https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12755)

[thumbnail of Finch-MLR-2022-Undermining-loyalty-to-legality-An-empirical-analysis-of-perceptions]
Preview
 Text. Filename: Finch_MLR_2022_Undermining_loyalty_to_legality_An_empirical_analysis_of_perceptions.pdf
Final Published Version
License: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 logo
Download (580kB)| Preview

Abstract

This article substantially extends the existing constitutional and legal critiques of the use of soft law public health guidance in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing upon the findings of a national survey undertaken during the first wave of the pandemic in June 2020, it shows how the perceived legal status of lockdown rules made a significant difference as to whether the UK public complied with them and that this effect is a product of the legitimacy that law itself enjoys within UK society. Based on this analysis, it argues that the problems with the government's approach to guidance, that have been subjected to criticism in constitutional and legal terms, may also be open to critique on the basis that they risk undermining the public's loyalty to the law itself.

ORCID iDs

Finch, Naomi, Halliday, Simon ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5107-6783, Tomlinson, Joe, Meers, Jed and Wilberforce, Mark;
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)