The ordinary law of emergencies and democratic derogation from rights

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511552021.011

10 - The ordinary law of emergencies and democratic derogation from rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 August 2009

Kent Roach

Edited by

Victor V. Ramraj

Show author details

Victor V. Ramraj: Affiliation:
National University of Singapore

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

The post-9/11 scholarly debate on emergency powers as represented by the debate between David Dyzenhaus and Oren Gross over legality and extra-legal powers has defined the concept of emergency narrowly in relation to the detention or disruption of suspected terrorists or enemies. This understanding of emergencies is dramatically under-inclusive. It ignores genuine emergencies such as Hurricane Katrina, the Asian tsunami and pandemics, as well as the need for recovery after particularly disruptive acts of terrorism. Although cloaked in the rhetorical urgency of emergencies, the post-9/11 debate about emergencies has been about the treatment of the rights of suspected terrorists, not about how a state will respond to the full range of emergencies that modern society will face.

Although I am sceptical about whether the post-9/11 debate is really about emergencies, I am not sceptical about the fact that modern society will confront genuine emergencies. Such emergencies will require the state to engage in extraordinary measures that may have adverse effects on rights. Modern states have recognised the reality of emergencies and have enacted framework statutes to enable the state to deal with emergencies. To this end, we should be concerned about the ordinary law that governs all emergencies. In contrast to the mountains of work that have been devoted to anti-terrorism measures, emergency laws in Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States have attracted comparatively scant scholarly attention.

Type: Chapter
Information: Emergencies and the Limits of Legality , pp. 229 - 257

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511552021.011 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Dyzenhaus, D., ‘The State of Emergency in Legal Theory’, in Ramraj, V.V., Hor, M. and Roach, K. (eds.), Global Anti-Terrorism Law and Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005)Google Scholar

Dyzenhaus, D., The Constitution of Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006)CrossRef Google Scholar

Roach, K., ‘Must We Trade Rights for Security?’ (2006) 27 Cardozo Law Review2151Google Scholar

Gross, O., ‘Chaos and Rules: Should Responses to Violent Crises Always Be Constitutional?’ (2003) 112 Yale Law Journal1011CrossRef Google Scholar

Gross, O. and Aoláin, F. Ní, Law in Times of Crisis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006)CrossRef Google Scholar

Lobel, J., ‘Emergency Power and the Decline of Liberalism’ (1989) 98 Yale Law Journal1358CrossRef Google Scholar

Ackerman, B., Before the Next Attack (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), p. 99Google Scholar

Cole, D., Enemy Aliens (New York: The New Press, 2003)Google Scholar

,Canada, Securing an Open Society: The National Security Policy (Ottawa: Privy Council Office, 2004)Google Scholar

Roach, K., September 11: Consequences for Canada (Montreal: McGill Queens Press, 2003)Google Scholar

Scheppele, K.L., ‘Small Emergencies’ (2006) 40 Georgia Law Review835Google Scholar

Gross, Oren, ‘Stability and Flexibilty: A Dicey Business’, in Global Anti-Terrorism Law and Policy, p. 92

Schmitt, C., Political Theology (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1985)Google Scholar

Agamben, G., State of Exception (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005)CrossRef Google Scholar

Posner, E. and Vermeule, A., Terror in the Balance: Security, Liberty, and the Courts (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 163–8 and 28Google Scholar

Sidel, M., More Secure? Less Free? (Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press, 2004)CrossRef Google Scholar

Choudhry, S. and Roach, K., ‘Racial and Ethnic Profiling: Statutory Discretion, Constitutional Remedies and Democratic Accountability’ (2003) 41 Osgoode Hall Law Journal1Google Scholar

Arar, Maher, Analysis and Recommendations (Ottawa: Public Works and Government Services, 2006) at 9Google Scholar

Walker, C. and Broderick, J., The Civil Contingencies Act 2004: Risk, Resilience and the Law in the United Kingdom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), ch. 5Google Scholar

Scheppele, K.L., ‘North American Emergencies: The Use of Emergency Powers in Canada and the United States’ (2006) 4 International Journal of Constitutional Law213CrossRef Google Scholar

Weinrib, L., ‘Terrorism's Challenge to the Constitutional Order’, in Daniels, R.J., Macklem, P. and Roach, K. (eds.), The Security of Freedom: Essays on Canada's Anti-Terrorism Bill (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001), p. 105Google Scholar

Roach, K., ‘Review and Oversight of National Security Activities’ (2007) 29 Cardozo Law Review53Google Scholar

Tushnet, M., ‘Controlling Executive Power in the War Against Terrorism’ (2005) 118 Harvard Law Review2673Google Scholar

Ferejohn, J. and Pasquino, P., ‘The Law of the Exception: A Typology of Emergency Powers’ (2004) 2 International Journal of Constitutional Law210CrossRef Google Scholar

Tushnet, M., Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999)Google Scholar

Dyzenhaus, D., ‘Schmitt v. Dicey: Are States of Emergency Inside or Outside of the Legal Order’ (2006) 27 Cardozo Law Review 2005 at 2038 and 2040Google Scholar

Waldron, J., ‘Some Models of Dialogue Between Judges and Legislators’ (2004) 23 Supreme Court Law Review7Google Scholar

Gross, , ‘Are Torture Warrants Warranted?’ (2004) 88 Minnesota Law Review1481Google Scholar

Lyon, N., ‘Constitutional Validity of Sections 3 and 4 of the Public Order Regulations’ (1971) 18 McGill Law Journal 136Google Scholar

Roach, K., ‘Constitutional, Remedial and International Dialogues About Rights: The Canada Experience’ (2005) 40 Texas International Law Journal537Google Scholar

Gearty, C., ‘Reflections on Civil Liberties in an Age of Counterterrorism’ (2003) 41 Osgoode Hall Law Journal185 at 203Google Scholar

Macdonald, R.St.J., ‘Derogations under Article 15 of the European Convention’ (1998) 36 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law225Google Scholar

Dyzenhaus, , ‘Law as Justification’ (1998) 14 South African Journal of Human Rights11CrossRef Google Scholar

Gardbaum, S., ‘The New Commonwealth Model of Constitutionalism’ (2001) 49 American Journal of Comparative Law707CrossRef Google Scholar

Roach, K., ‘Constitutional and Common Law Dialogues’ (2001) 80 Canadian Bar Review481Google Scholar