54

Introduction: In Senegal, diverse measures were implemented to address the challenges brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although fear initially encouraged compliance, this sentiment soon gave way to reluctance, leading to skepticism regarding the social acceptability of these measures. For decisions to be accepted, they must be grounded in a deep understanding of social contexts, and decision-makers must promote dialogue and actively listen to the communities involved. Given that these health measures impact human life, their definition necessitates ethical deliberation. Purpose of the research: This study delves into the social acceptability of the strategies used to fight COVID-19. The foundations of their societal legitimacy are scrutinized through an ethical evaluation of political decision-making amid the uncertainty that characterized this period. Results: Despite Senegal receiving praise for its coordinated response, the measures taken could have been better tailored to diverse social contexts, mitigating the creation of social vulnerabilities. The widespread reactions highlighted the importance of upholding human dignity, as the political management seemed to overlook the inherently human aspects of the process. The communication process predominantly leaned toward instilling fear and guilt, contradicting the principles of autonomy and individual prerogative. COVID-19 has also illuminated the limitations of scientific knowledge, revealing the intricate interplay between science, politics, and ethical considerations in the context of uncertainty. Conclusions: An intimate relationship exists between community involvement practices, the ethics of control measures, and social acceptability. For these measures to be embraced by the populace, they must be characterized by fairness and a deep respect for human rights.