(i) What is Martial Law? It is difficult to define martial law, especially because of "the haze of uncertainty which envelops it. " 1 The expression is used to denote a variety of forms of government or law, such as military law governing soldiers in the service of the State, military govern ment in occupied areas, any kind of arbitrary government in which the military arm plays a dominant role, and the emergency ad ministration "which obtains in a domestic community when the military authority carries on the government, or at least some of its functions. " 2 It is in the sense indicated last that martial law is discussed in the following pages. In this sense, it is "the extension of military government to domestic areas and civil persons in case of invasion or rebellion. . . it is a suspension of normal civil government in order to restore it and has civilians for its subjects and civil areas for its loci of operation. " 3 Thus martial law has to be clearly distinguished from military law and military government, though 4 all these have common roots in history and logic. The term 'martial law' was originally applied to the law ad ministered by the court of the Marshal and the Constable of England. There are two theories about the source of the word 'martial' in the expression. One theory is that the term 'martial 1 C. Fairman, The Law of Martial Rule, page 19. 2 idem, page 30.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. To ensure a quality reading experience, this work has been proofread and republished using a format that seamlessly blends the original graphical elements with text in an easy-to-read typeface. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

This book presents a comprehensive legal and constitutional study of emergency powers from a comparative common law perspective. It is one of very few comparative studies on three jurisdictions and arguably the first one to explore in detail various emergency powers, statutory and common law, constitutional and statutory law, martial law and military acting-in-aid of civil authority, wartime and peacetime invocations, and several related and vital themes like judicial review of emergency powers (existence, scope and degree). The three jurisdictions compared here are: the pure implied common law model (employed by the UK), implied constitutional model (employed by the USA) and the explicit constitutional model (employed by India). The book’s content has important implications, as these three jurisdictions collectively cover the largest population within the common law world, and also provide maximum representative diversity. The book covers the various positions on external emergencies as opposed to internal emergencies, economic/financial emergencies, and emergent inroads being made into state autonomy by the central or federal governments, through use of powers like Article 356 of the Indian Constitution. By providing a detailed examination of the law and practice of emergency powers, the book shares a wealth of valuable insights. Specific sub-chapters address questions like – what is the true meaning of ‘martial law’; who can invoke ‘martial law’; when can it be invoked and suspended; what happens when the military is called in to aid civilian authorities; can martial law be deemed to exist or coexist when this happens; what are the limits on state powers when an economic emergency is declared; and, above all, can, and if so, when and how should courts judicially review emergency powers? These and several other questions are asked and answered in this study. Though several checks and constraints have been devised regarding the scope and extent of ‘emergency powers,’ these powers are still prone to misuse, as all vast powers are. A study of the legal propositions on this subject, especially from a comparative perspective, is valuable for any body politic that aspires to practice democracy, while also allowing constitutionally controlled aberrations to protect that democracy.

A comprehensive history of martial law, outlining how it was a vital component of England's domestic and imperial legal order.

This book is a volume in the Penn Press Anniversary Collection. To mark its 125th anniversary in 2015, the University of Pennsylvania Press rereleased more than 1,100 titles from Penn Press's distinguished backlist from 1899-1999 that had fallen out of print. Spanning an entire century, the Anniversary Collection offers peer-reviewed scholarship in a wide range of subject areas.

This book shows how emergency powers can be justifiable in liberal democracies without suspending liberal norms.

The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) has become one of the most controversial laws, both in India and the world. A few NGOs and human rights activists have described it as draconian, alleging that it gives the armed forces unrestricted power to ‘arrest’ without warrant, ‘destroy property’ and ‘shoot to kill’, besides providing them with complete immunity. The loud and continuous clamour against the Act has drawn the attention of various international organizations. The UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Christof Heyns, has recently called for the repeal of the law, stating: “AFSPA allows the state to override rights. Such a law has no role in a democracy and should be scrapped.” On the other hand, the armed forces hold that the AFSPA is necessary for tackling the growing menace of militancy and protecting their men from the unnecessary harassment caused by litigation. General V K Singh, the former chief of army staff and now a cabinet minister, has emphasized that the AFSPA is a ‘functional requirement’ of the armed forces. This is the first book in India not only to attempt a complete analysis of the various provisions of the AFSPA, but also to provide an insight into the legislative efforts of other democracies to meet the challenges of growing terrorism. It delves into cases of human rights violations in which members of the armed forces have been implicated, and at the same time, argues that it is equally important to safeguard the human rights of the members of the armed forces. In order to help find an amicable solution, the author makes a few recommendations for the consideration of the government and armed forces.