From the perspective of the constitutional principle of the rule of law, what is the problem with government ministers seeking to impose their interpretation of legal rules on individuals when the law underpinning their actions does not seem to provide for such an interpretation, strictly speaking?

law

The national effort to tackle the Coronavirus health emergency has resulted in UK ministers being granted some of the broadest legislative powers ever seen in peacetime. The Coronavirus Act 2020 and other Acts of Parliament have been used to greatly restrict the liberty of movement of people. At the same time, Ministers have issued guidance on how its legal rules restricting liberty should be applied. Sometimes this guidance has seemed to increase the level of restrictions beyond those actually set out in law. For example, under the first national lockdown in England and Wales, the law prohibited you leaving your home except for essential purposes. One of these essential purposes was daily exercise (The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020, s6(2)(b)). Government initial guidance suggested that this meant one could only leave their home once a day for such exercise.
Bearing the above in mind, address the following question under the TWO TASKS BELOW:

‘From the perspective of the constitutional principle of the rule of law, what is the problem with government ministers seeking to impose their interpretation of legal rules on individuals when the law underpinning their actions does not seem to provide for such an interpretation, strictly speaking?’

In order to do this, you need to do the following:

Part 1 Unpacking the Question (up to 450 words):
Break down the question into its constituent parts, explaining exactly what you think the question is asking you to do.
Identify the constitutional concepts and key themes the question engages with.
Provide an outline or plan of how you think the question should be addressed if presenting it in an essay.