ABSTRACT
New knowledge changes preconceptions and assumptions, as well as the advice proffered by politicians and scientists. The unprecedented situation created by the pandemic prompted governments to introduce and enforce measures that would not have been publicly acceptable without the crisis. Changes in patterns of work, education, entertainment and modes of delivery of healthcare and other public and private services during the pandemic created new opportunities and the need for innovative coping strategies. But these changes also intensified pressures on families, businesses and public institutions while exacerbating deep-seated socio-economic divides. The public were likely to accept and rally behind governments where the rule-of-law was seen to underpin interventions in terms of clarity, certainty, accessibility and congruence, and where the measures applied were in harmony with notions of social responsibility. Decision-takers, whatever their political persuasion, had understood the importance of rapidly identifying hotspots within countries or regions and of implementing efficient and effective targeted testing and tracing regimes without infringing privacy rules.
