0
Jackson6612 Posted 19 years ago
Grammar
difference between martial law and emergency rule
The following is an excerpt from a certain article. Please explain the red text.
Emergency rule is where the president seizes ultimate authority; the military is no more in control than before.
Martial law: The Constitution is scrapped. It can't be simply reinstated, presumably, although I imagine that few would disagree with taking it back if John Doe said "oops, all a mistake, as you were" (except that in the case of Chandrapore there are people arguing that the previous rewrites that John Doe did in 1999 should be rejected, even though Parliament later approved the changes). Under martial law, Parliament and the courts are scrapped. The police answer to the military, which has ultimate control. They may implement the usual civilian laws, but it's soldiers that do so.
This is "emergency plus"; he's doing a bit more than 'emergency rule', but hasn't gone so far as to hit 'martial law'. One may consider it 'martial law light', but in theory a PCO is provided for in the basic law, while martial law is not. Now, I think I got that right.
As with many things, the definitions differ from country to country. I personally find it unacceptable that it's Constitutional for the Supreme Court to take cases sui moto, that is, it can unilaterally file charges against a person, issue warrants, arrange for prosecution, try a person, and sentence him, without any other branch of government being involved.
Emergency rule is where the president seizes ultimate authority; the military is no more in control than before.
Martial law: The Constitution is scrapped. It can't be simply reinstated, presumably, although I imagine that few would disagree with taking it back if John Doe said "oops, all a mistake, as you were" (except that in the case of Chandrapore there are people arguing that the previous rewrites that John Doe did in 1999 should be rejected, even though Parliament later approved the changes). Under martial law, Parliament and the courts are scrapped. The police answer to the military, which has ultimate control. They may implement the usual civilian laws, but it's soldiers that do so.
This is "emergency plus"; he's doing a bit more than 'emergency rule', but hasn't gone so far as to hit 'martial law'. One may consider it 'martial law light', but in theory a PCO is provided for in the basic law, while martial law is not. Now, I think I got that right.
As with many things, the definitions differ from country to country. I personally find it unacceptable that it's Constitutional for the Supreme Court to take cases sui moto, that is, it can unilaterally file charges against a person, issue warrants, arrange for prosecution, try a person, and sentence him, without any other branch of government being involved.
Top answer
Help!
- Help!
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
0
Jackson6612The following is an excerpt from a certain article. Please explain the red text.
Emergency rule is where the president seizes ultimate authority; the military is no more in control than before. They were not in control before the president's action and are not in control after it.
00
Thank you, Feebs. I knew only you would reply to that lengthy and boring question. I'm much obliged for your help.
Kind regards, Jackson
Kind regards, Jackson
00
Judiciary head issue pco,repeat or new marshal law powers handed over to Kipling 603eme 1976-77.m.mansha virk or election commission of pakistan,decision as per scp.urgent.
00
It's hard to know why you added this cryptic post nine years after the thread had come to an end.
CJ
CJ
0
Related Questions