Skip to main content

Public Safety

What actually changes in law when a government declares a state of emergency?

Less, and more specifically, than the phrase suggests. Two constitutions answer it with closed lists of what may be done; one bars amending the constitution while it runs; two systems have no such regime at all, and handle emergencies under ordinary law.

Fact-checkedSafety review clearedLast updated Last reviewed

In short

A state of emergency is a legal act with a name, made under a named provision, that switches on a defined set of powers for a defined time. It is not a description of a situation and it is not a general licence. The most useful thing to know about it is that in the systems that provide for one, the constitution usually says in advance exactly what it makes available.

Why it exists

AnalysisA government facing an armed insurrection or a catastrophe may need to do things ordinary law does not let it do — requisition property, restrict movement, spend without the usual authority. The alternative to providing for that in advance is not that it never happens; it is that it happens without a legal basis, without a time limit, and without anyone having decided beforehand what is off limits.

How it works

Brazil enumerates twice. Under an estado de defesa, Article 136 §1 permits restrictions on the rights of assembly — including within associations — on the secrecy of correspondence, and on the secrecy of telegraphic and telephone communication, plus temporary occupation and use of public property in the event of a public calamity.

Under an estado de sítio decreed on the Article 137(I) ground, Article 139 provides that só poderão ser tomadas contra as pessoas as seguintes medidas — only the following measures may be taken against persons — and then lists seven.

Spain lists on the other side of the line, and then withholds the list from its mildest regime. Article 55(1) of the Constitution names the articles that may be suspended, and provides that they may be suspended only when an estado de excepción or an estado de sitio is declared — not an estado de alarma.

AnalysisWhich matters because the alarma is the regime a government reaches for first. A system with three graded states has decided that the easiest one to declare is the one that changes least.

Czechia requires the answer to be given when the declaration is made. Article 6(1) of the constitutional act on security provides that a nouzový stav may be declared only with a statement of reasons, for a defined time and for a defined territory, and that simultaneously with the declaration musí vláda vymezit, která práva stanovená ve zvláštním zákoně — the Government must specify which rights laid down in a special statute — are restricted and to what extent.

Brazil adds a structural lock that has nothing to do with rights. Article 60 §1 provides that the Constitution may not be amended while a federal intervention, an estado de defesa or an estado de sítio is in force.

And some systems provide for none of this. The Constitution of Japan contains no emergency chapter, and therefore no derogation or suspension clause: limitation of Chapter III rights runs through the public welfare qualifier written into individual rights articles, which operates in ordinary conditions and extraordinary ones alike.

South Africa shows a third possibility — that the same country may operate a disaster regime and an emergency regime side by side, with materially different controls. A national state of disaster under the Disaster Management Act lapses three months after declaration, may be terminated earlier by the Minister by notice in the Gazette, and may be extended by the Minister a month at a time.

Brazil has the same doubling, and it runs the other way. Alongside the constitutional regimes of Articles 136 to 141, Lei nº 12.608/2012 provides an ordinary disaster emergency — situação de emergência and estado de calamidade pública — which municipalities declare from the bottom up, and which is about protection and relief rather than about restricting rights.

Australia shows a third technique: an emergency power drafted as a closed list of things it may touch. While a national emergency declaration is in force a responsible Minister may vary, disapply or substitute provisions of Commonwealth law dealing with an enumerated set of administrative formalities — writing, signature, production of documents, witnessing and the like — and section 15(8) expressly walls the power off from the criminal-procedure, intelligence, surveillance, interception and integrity statutes.

Common misconceptions

Widely held beliefs that do not match how the system actually operates.

  • Common belief: A state of emergency suspends the constitution.

    In practice: The opposite is stated in two of these texts. Brazil’s Article 60 §1 bars amending the Constitution while a state of defence or state of siege is in force, and Spain’s Article 116(5) provides that the functioning of the constitutional powers may not be interrupted.

  • Common belief: A state of emergency lets a government do whatever the situation requires.

    In practice: Not where the text is a closed list. Brazil’s Article 139 provides that only the seven listed measures may be taken against persons, and Czechia requires the Government to specify at the moment of declaration which rights are restricted and to what extent.

  • Common belief: Declaring any state of emergency allows rights to be suspended.

    In practice: Not in Spain. Article 55(1) permits suspension only under an estado de excepción or an estado de sitio, and never under the estado de alarma — which is the regime most readily declared.

  • Common belief: Every country has a state of emergency in its constitution.

    In practice: Japan’s Constitution has no emergency chapter and no derogation or suspension clause at all, and limitation of rights runs through the ordinary "public welfare" qualifier instead.

  • Common belief: A state of disaster and a state of emergency are the same thing.

    In practice: Not in South Africa, which has both. A national state of disaster lapses after three months and is extended by ministerial notice; a state of emergency is limited to twenty-one days and extended only by the National Assembly on rising majorities.

How this varies between jurisdictions

A required section on every guide. Arrangements differ between countries, and we say how.

Five systems, four answers.

  • A closed list of permitted measures, stated twice for two regimes — Brazil, CF Arts. 136 §1 and 139.
  • A closed list of suspendable rights, unavailable in the mildest regime — Spain, CE Art. 55(1) with Art. 116.
  • A duty to specify the restricted rights at the moment of declaration — Czechia, ústavní zákon č. 110/1998 Sb. Čl. 6(1).
  • No emergency chapter in the constitution, so no derogation or suspension clause and the ordinary “public welfare” qualifier does the rights work — while a declared state of emergency disaster and a narrow Cabinet Order power sit in ordinary statute — Japan.
  • Two parallel regimes with different controls — South Africa, Disaster Management Act 2002 alongside Constitution s. 37.

Worked examples

Systems this platform has researched. Each example links to the dossier it draws on.

Brazil
Answers with a closed list twice over: Art. 136 §1 enumerates what may be restricted under an estado de defesa, and Art. 139 provides that under an estado de sítio on the Art. 137(I) ground ONLY seven listed measures may be taken against persons.
Spain
Answers with a closed list of suspendable rights in Art. 55(1) — and makes it unavailable in the mildest of the three regimes, since suspension is possible only under an estado de excepción or estado de sitio, never an estado de alarma.
Czechia
Requires the answer to be given at the moment of declaration: Čl. 6(1) obliges the Government, simultaneously with declaring a nouzový stav, to specify which rights laid down in a special statute are restricted and to what extent.

Where the pattern does not hold

Systems at the same level that arrange this differently. The pattern above is a pattern, not a rule.

Japan
Has no emergency chapter in its Constitution at all, and therefore no derogation or suspension clause. Limitation of Chapter III rights runs through the "public welfare" qualifier written into individual articles, which operates in ordinary times and in extraordinary ones alike.

Rights and accountability

AnalysisSpecifying in advance what an emergency makes available is what allows anyone to say afterwards that a particular measure was outside it. That is the practical value of a closed list: not that it prevents a government from acting, but that it makes the boundary of the action a question of law rather than of judgement.

AnalysisThe locks on the constitutional order do related work. A government that cannot amend the constitution or dissolve the chamber while the emergency runs cannot use the emergency to change the rules under which it will be judged for the emergency.

AnalysisNone of which is an argument that these powers should not exist. Each of these constitutions provides for them deliberately, having decided that a state which cannot act in a catastrophe is not protecting anyone — and then having decided, equally deliberately, exactly how far the action may go.

What we could not establish

  • Five systems are described from primary text. What a declaration changes anywhere else was not researched.
  • This page describes what the instruments permit. It states nothing about what any government has done under one, and nothing about whether any measure was justified.

Where to go next

Related: who can declare a state of emergency, how emergency powers end, and limits on public power.

Sources

  1. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988

    Presidência da República — Casa Civil (Planalto) · Legislation · 1988-10-05 · link verified 2026-07-25

    The authoritative Portuguese text, read in full. THE backbone of the Brazil pages. Supports: the federation of the Union, the States, the Federal District and the Municipalities, 'todos autônomos' (Art. 18; Art. 1); separation of powers (Art. 2); the criminal-justice guarantees of Art. 5 — devido processo legal (LIV), contraditório e ampla defesa (LV), presumption of innocence 'ninguém será considerado culpado até o trânsito em julgado de sentença penal condenatória' (LVII), and habeas corpus (LXVIII); that penal and procedural law are the EXCLUSIVE (privativa) competence of the Union (Art. 22, I) while direito penitenciário is CONCURRENT (Art. 24, I) and the States hold the reserved/residual competences (Art. 25 §1); public security through the six órgãos of Art. 144 (I polícia federal; II rodoviária federal; III ferroviária federal; IV polícias civis; V polícias militares e corpos de bombeiros militares; VI polícias penais, added by EC 104/2019), with the polícias civis 'dirigidas por delegados de polícia de carreira' exercising 'as funções de polícia judiciária e a apuração de infrações penais, exceto as militares' (§4), the polícias militares holding 'a polícia ostensiva e a preservação da ordem pública' (§5), and both subordinate to the Governors (§6); the Judiciary organs of Art. 92 (STF, CNJ, STJ, TST, TRFs/Juízes Federais, and the labour, electoral, military and state courts), the STF as guardian of the Constitution (Art. 102), the CNJ (Art. 103-B) and state justice (Art. 125); the Ministério Público as 'instituição permanente, essencial à função jurisdicional do Estado' defending 'a ordem jurídica, o regime democrático e os interesses sociais e individuais indisponíveis', with autonomy and the principles of unidade, indivisibilidade e independência funcional (Art. 127), its structure MPU (MPF/MPT/MPM/MPDFT) + MPE (Art. 128), its functions including promoting 'privativamente, a ação penal pública' (Art. 129 I) and the inquérito civil / ação civil pública for interesses difusos e coletivos (Art. 129 III), and the CNMP (Art. 130-A); and that the Union organizes and maintains the Judiciary, Ministério Público and police of the Federal District (Art. 21, XIII–XIV). The Portuguese text alone has legal effect. WAVE 12 ADDITION, further clauses of Art. 5 read directly from the same Planalto text: XXXV a lei não excluirá da apreciação do Poder Judiciário lesão ou ameaça a direito; XXXVI the law shall not impair a vested right, a perfect juridical act or res judicata; XXXVII não haverá juízo ou tribunal de exceção; XXXIX não há crime sem lei anterior que o defina, nem pena sem prévia cominação legal; XL a lei penal não retroagirá, salvo para beneficiar o réu; LVI evidence obtained by unlawful means is inadmissible in the process; LXXV the State shall indemnify a person convicted by judicial error and one held beyond the term fixed in the sentence; LXXVIII reasonable duration of proceedings and the means guaranteeing the speed of their handling, in the judicial and administrative spheres. WAVE 14 ADDITION, further provisions read directly from the same Planalto text: Art. 5º LXXIV “o Estado prestará assistência jurídica integral e gratuita aos que comprovarem insuficiência de recursos”; Art. 5º LXXVI that civil birth registration and the death certificate are free, in the form of the law, for the recognisedly poor; Art. 5º LXXVII that actions of habeas corpus and habeas data are free, as are, in the form of the law, the acts necessary to the exercise of citizenship; Art. 103-B § 4º that the Conselho Nacional de Justiça has competence for “o controle da atuação administrativa e financeira do Poder Judiciário e do cumprimento dos deveres funcionais dos juízes”, including safeguarding the autonomy of the Judiciary and issuing regulatory acts (I), reviewing the legality of administrative acts of members or organs of the Judiciary and annulling, revising or setting a period for compliance (II), and receiving complaints against members or organs of the Judiciary including its auxiliary services and delegated notarial and registry services, taking over disciplinary proceedings in course and ordering removal, availability or retirement and applying other administrative sanctions (III); Art. 133 “O advogado é indispensável à administração da justiça, sendo inviolável por seus atos e manifestações no exercício da profissão, nos limites da lei”; and Art. 134 in its current wording, that the Defensoria Pública is a permanent institution essential to the jurisdictional function of the State, incumbent on it, as an expression and instrument of the democratic regime, fundamentally to provide legal guidance, the promotion of human rights and the defence, in all degrees, judicial and extrajudicial, of the individual and collective rights of the needy. WAVE 20 ADDITION. Read from the same Planalto text. Brazil states its emergency architecture as a closed system: two regimes, an exhaustive list of measures for each, and an express preservation of liability afterwards. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136, caput: “Art. 136. O Presidente da República pode, ouvidos o Conselho da República e o Conselho de Defesa Nacional, decretar estado de defesa para preservar ou prontamente restabelecer, em locais restritos e determinados, a ordem pública ou a paz social ameaçadas por grave e iminente instabilidade institucional ou atingidas por calamidades de grandes proporções na natureza.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136 § 2º, added after adversarial review found this platform quoting it from a record that did not carry it, and re-verified against the Planalto text: “§ 2º O tempo de duração do estado de defesa não será superior a trinta dias, podendo ser prorrogado uma vez, por igual período, se persistirem as razões que justificaram a sua decretação.” Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136 §1º, I–II: “I - restrições aos direitos de: a) reunião, ainda que exercida no seio das associações; b) sigilo de correspondência; c) sigilo de comunicação telegráfica e telefônica; II - ocupação e uso temporário de bens e serviços públicos, na hipótese de calamidade pública, respondendo a União pelos danos e custos decorrentes.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136 §3º, I–IV: “§ 3º Na vigência do estado de defesa: I - a prisão por crime contra o Estado, determinada pelo executor da medida, será por este comunicada imediatamente ao juiz competente, que a relaxará, se não for legal, facultado ao preso requerer exame de corpo de delito à autoridade policial; II - a comunicação será acompanhada de declaração, pela autoridade, do estado físico e mental do detido no momento de sua autuação; III - a prisão ou detenção de qualquer pessoa não poderá ser superior a dez dias, salvo quando autorizada pelo Poder Judiciário; IV - é vedada a incomunicabilidade do preso.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136 §§4º–7º: “§ 4º Decretado o estado de defesa ou sua prorrogação, o Presidente da República, dentro de vinte e quatro horas, submeterá o ato com a respectiva justificação ao Congresso Nacional, que decidirá por maioria absoluta. § 5º Se o Congresso Nacional estiver em recesso, será convocado, extraordinariamente, no prazo de cinco dias. § 6º O Congresso Nacional apreciará o decreto dentro de dez dias contados de seu recebimento, devendo continuar funcionando enquanto vigorar o estado de defesa. § 7º Rejeitado o decreto, cessa imediatamente o estado de defesa.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 138, caput: “Art. 138. O decreto do estado de sítio indicará sua duração, as normas necessárias a sua execução e as garantias constitucionais que ficarão suspensas, e, depois de publicado, o Presidente da República designará o executor das medidas específicas e as áreas abrangidas.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 139: “Art. 139. Na vigência do estado de sítio decretado com fundamento no art. 137, I, só poderão ser tomadas contra as pessoas as seguintes medidas: I - obrigação de permanência em localidade determinada; II - detenção em edifício não destinado a acusados ou condenados por crimes comuns; III - restrições relativas à inviolabilidade da correspondência, ao sigilo das comunicações, à prestação de informações e à liberdade de imprensa, radiodifusão e televisão, na forma da lei; IV - suspensão da liberdade de reunião; V - busca e apreensão em domicílio; VI - intervenção nas empresas de serviços públicos; VII - requisição de bens. Parágrafo único. Não se inclui nas restrições do inciso III a difusão de pronunciamentos de parlamentares efetuados em suas Casas Legislativas, desde que liberada pela respectiva Mesa.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 141 and parágrafo único: “Art. 141. Cessado o estado de defesa ou o estado de sítio, cessarão também seus efeitos, sem prejuízo da responsabilidade pelos ilícitos cometidos por seus executores ou agentes. Parágrafo único. Logo que cesse o estado de defesa ou o estado de sítio, as medidas aplicadas em sua vigência serão relatadas pelo Presidente da República, em mensagem ao Congresso Nacional, com especificação e justificação das providências adotadas, com relação nominal dos atingidos e indicação das restrições aplicadas.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 60 §§1º and 4º: “§ 1º A Constituição não poderá ser emendada na vigência de intervenção federal, de estado de defesa ou de estado de sítio. […] § 4º Não será objeto de deliberação a proposta de emenda tendente a abolir: I - a forma federativa de Estado; II - o voto direto, secreto, universal e periódico; III - a separação dos Poderes; IV - os direitos e garantias individuais.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 142, caput and §1º: “Art. 142. As Forças Armadas, constituídas pela Marinha, pelo Exército e pela Aeronáutica, são instituições nacionais permanentes e regulares, organizadas com base na hierarquia e na disciplina, sob a autoridade suprema do Presidente da República, e destinam-se à defesa da Pátria, à garantia dos poderes constitucionais e, por iniciativa de qualquer destes, da lei e da ordem. § 1º Lei complementar estabelecerá as normas gerais a serem adotadas na organização, no preparo e no emprego das Forças Armadas.”. Cited for the closed lists of permitted measures, the immediate judicial communication of an arrest, the congressional role, the express preservation of liability for unlawful acts after the regime ends, and the bar on amending the Constitution while one is in force. It records no declaration of either regime and supports no claim about any other country.WAVE 21 ADDITION. Article 5 read incisum by incisum from the same Planalto consolidated text. Supports the caput, and specifically its rights-holder scope: “Todos são iguais perante a lei, sem distinção de qualquer natureza, garantindo-se aos brasileiros e aos estrangeiros residentes no País a inviolabilidade do direito à vida, à liberdade, à igualdade, à segurança e à propriedade, nos termos seguintes”. Supports Art. 5º X: “são invioláveis a intimidade, a vida privada, a honra e a imagem das pessoas, assegurado o direito a indenização pelo dano material ou moral decorrente de sua violação”. Supports Art. 5º XI: “a casa é asilo inviolável do indivíduo, ninguém nela podendo penetrar sem consentimento do morador, salvo em caso de flagrante delito ou desastre, ou para prestar socorro, ou, durante o dia, por determinação judicial” — note that judicial authorisation is textually confined to daytime, which is the narrowest such qualifier found in this wave. Supports Art. 5º XII: “é inviolável o sigilo da correspondência e das comunicações telegráficas, de dados e das comunicações telefônicas, salvo, no último caso, por ordem judicial, nas hipóteses e na forma que a lei estabelecer para fins de investigação criminal ou instrução processual penal” — the exception reaches the LAST-NAMED category only, requires a judicial order, and is confined to criminal investigation or criminal procedural instruction. Supports Art. 5º LIV (“ninguém será privado da liberdade ou de seus bens sem o devido processo legal”), LV (contraditório and ampla defesa in judicial and administrative proceedings), LVI (“são inadmissíveis, no processo, as provas obtidas por meios ilícitos”) and LVII. Supports Art. 5º LXI: “ninguém será preso senão em flagrante delito ou por ordem escrita e fundamentada de autoridade judiciária competente, salvo nos casos de transgressão militar ou crime propriamente militar, definidos em lei”. Supports LXII (arrest and place of custody communicated immediately to the competent judge and to the family or a person indicated). Supports LXIII: “o preso será informado de seus direitos, entre os quais o de permanecer calado, sendo-lhe assegurada a assistência da família e de advogado” — a constitutional notification duty coupled with a silence right, and worded for “o preso”. Supports LXIV, LXV (“a prisão ilegal será imediatamente relaxada pela autoridade judiciária”) and LXVI. Supports § 1º (“As normas definidoras dos direitos e garantias fundamentais têm aplicação imediata”), § 2º (rights expressed in the Constitution do not exclude others deriving from the regime and principles it adopts, or from international treaties to which Brazil is party) and § 3º (“Os tratados e convenções internacionais sobre direitos humanos que forem aprovados, em cada Casa do Congresso Nacional, em dois turnos, por três quintos dos votos dos respectivos membros, serão equivalentes às emendas constitucionais”, added by Emenda Constitucional nº 45 de 2004). VERIFIED NEGATIVE: Article 5 contains no general limitation clause of the Canadian, South African, Kenyan or Swiss kind; limits appear inside individual incisos. Constitutional text only — no decision of the Supremo Tribunal Federal, no statute, nothing about any other country.

  2. Constitución Española de 1978

    Boletín Oficial del Estado (boe.es), BOE-A-1978-31229 · Legislation · 1978-12-29 · link verified 2026-07-26

    The authoritative Castilian text, read in full. Supports: art. 2 (the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation and the right to autonomy of the nationalities and regions); art. 137 (the State organised into municipalities, provinces and Autonomous Communities); art. 145.1 ('En ningún caso se admitirá la federación de Comunidades Autónomas' — federation is constitutionally forbidden, so Spain is a decentralised UNITARY state); art. 148 (competences the Communities MAY assume) and art. 149.1 (the State's EXCLUSIVE competences), including art. 149.1.6 ('Legislación mercantil, penal y penitenciaria; legislación procesal' — criminal, penitentiary and procedural LEGISLATION is exclusively the State's), art. 149.1.5 (Administration of Justice), and art. 149.1.29 (public security, 'sin perjuicio de la posibilidad de creación de policías por las Comunidades Autónomas' — the basis for autonomous police); art. 104 (security forces under the Government); art. 117.5 ('El principio de unidad jurisdiccional es la base de la organización y funcionamiento de los Tribunales' — judicial unity); art. 122 (the Consejo General del Poder Judicial as the judiciary's governing body); art. 123 (the Tribunal Supremo, 'con jurisdicción en toda España, es el órgano jurisdiccional superior en todos los órdenes'); art. 124 (the Ministerio Fiscal, national, acting under unidad de actuación y dependencia jerárquica); art. 152.1 (a Tribunal Superior de Justicia culminating the judicial organisation in each community, without prejudice to the Supreme Court); and arts. 24-25 (due-process and penal principles). WAVE 19 ADDITION, read from the same authoritative Castilian text. Supports art. 53.1, that the rights and liberties recognised in Chapter Two bind all public powers and may be regulated only by law respecting their essential content, protected in accordance with art. 161.1.a); and art. 53.2 in terms: "Cualquier ciudadano podrá recabar la tutela de las libertades y derechos reconocidos en el artículo 14 y la Sección primera del Capítulo segundo ante los Tribunales ordinarios por un procedimiento basado en los principios de preferencia y sumariedad y, en su caso, a través del recurso de amparo ante el Tribunal Constitucional" — protection is sought first before the ORDINARY courts by a preferential and summary procedure, and where appropriate thereafter by amparo before the Constitutional Court. Supports art. 54, that an organic law regulates the Defensor del Pueblo as high commissioner of the Cortes Generales for the defence of the rights in that Title, who may supervise the activity of the Administration and reports to the Cortes. Cited for the SEQUENCE — ordinary courts first, constitutional court where appropriate — and not for any claim about admissibility criteria or outcomes. WAVE 20 ADDITION. Read from the same authoritative Castilian text on the BOE. Spain writes the emergency architecture into the constitution itself in more detail than almost any system in this wave. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 116(1): “1. Una ley orgánica regulará los estados de alarma, de excepción y de sitio, y las competencias y limitaciones correspondientes.”. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 116(2), (3) and (4): “2. El estado de alarma será declarado por el Gobierno mediante decreto acordado en Consejo de Ministros por un plazo máximo de quince días, dando cuenta al Congreso de los Diputados, reunido inmediatamente al efecto y sin cuya autorización no podrá ser prorrogado dicho plazo. El decreto determinará el ámbito territorial a que se extienden los efectos de la declaración. 3. El estado de excepción será declarado por el Gobierno mediante decreto acordado en Consejo de Ministros, previa autorización del Congreso de los Diputados. La autorización y proclamación del estado de excepción deberá determinar expresamente los efectos del mismo, el ámbito territorial a que se extiende y su duración, que no podrá exceder de treinta días, prorrogables por otro plazo igual, con los mismos requisitos. 4. El estado de sitio será declarado por la mayoría absoluta del Congreso de los Diputados, a propuesta exclusiva del Gobierno. El Congreso determinará su ámbito territorial, duración y condiciones.”. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 55(1): “1. Los derechos reconocidos en los artículos 17, 18, apartados 2 y 3, artículos 19, 20, apartados 1, a) y d), y 5, artículos 21, 28, apartado 2, y artículo 37, apartado 2, podrán ser suspendidos cuando se acuerde la declaración del estado de excepción o de sitio en los términos previstos en la Constitución. Se exceptúa de lo establecido anteriormente el apartado 3 del artículo 17 para el supuesto de declaración de estado de excepción.”. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 116(5); cf. Ley Orgánica 4/1981 Art. 1.Cuatro ("La declaración de los estados de alarma, excepción y sitio no interrumpe el normal funcionamiento de los poderes constitucionales del Estado."): “5. No podrá procederse a la disolución del Congreso mientras estén declarados algunos de los estados comprendidos en el presente artículo, quedando automáticamente convocadas las Cámaras si no estuvieren en período de sesiones. Su funcionamiento, así como el de los demás poderes constitucionales del Estado, no podrán interrumpirse durante la vigencia de estos estados. Disuelto el Congreso o expirado su mandato, si se produjere alguna de las situaciones que dan lugar a cualquiera de dichos estados, las competencias del Congreso serán asumidas por su Diputación Permanente.”. Supports Constitución Española de 1978, Art. 117(5)-(6); Ley Orgánica 4/1981 Art. 35 ("En la declaración del estado de sitio el Congreso de los Diputados podrá determinar los delitos que durante su vigencia quedan sometidos a la Jurisdicción Militar."): “5. El principio de unidad jurisdiccional es la base de la organización y funcionamiento de los Tribunales. La ley regulará el ejercicio de la jurisdicción militar en el ámbito estrictamente castrense y en los supuestos de estado de sitio, de acuerdo con los principios de la Constitución. 6. Se prohíben los Tribunales de excepción.”. Cited for the three graded regimes, the closed list of suspendable rights and the express bar on suspension under the estado de alarma, the institutional-continuity guarantee, and the confinement of military jurisdiction. It records no declaration and supports no claim about any other country.WAVE 21 ADDITION. Read from the same BOE consolidated text, article by article. Supports Art. 17(1)-(4): “1. Toda persona tiene derecho a la libertad y a la seguridad. Nadie puede ser privado de su libertad, sino con la observancia de lo establecido en este artículo y en los casos y en la forma previstos en la ley. 2. La detención preventiva no podrá durar más del tiempo estrictamente necesario para la realización de las averiguaciones tendentes al esclarecimiento de los hechos, y, en todo caso, en el plazo máximo de setenta y dos horas, el detenido deberá ser puesto en libertad o a disposición de la autoridad judicial. 3. Toda persona detenida debe ser informada de forma inmediata, y de modo que le sea comprensible, de sus derechos y de las razones de su detención, no pudiendo ser obligada a declarar. Se garantiza la asistencia de abogado al detenido en las diligencias policiales y judiciales, en los términos que la ley establezca. 4. La ley regulará un procedimiento de «habeas corpus» [...]” Supports Art. 18(1)-(4): “1. Se garantiza el derecho al honor, a la intimidad personal y familiar y a la propia imagen. 2. El domicilio es inviolable. Ninguna entrada o registro podrá hacerse en él sin consentimiento del titular o resolución judicial, salvo en caso de flagrante delito. 3. Se garantiza el secreto de las comunicaciones y, en especial, de las postales, telegráficas y telefónicas, salvo resolución judicial. 4. La ley limitará el uso de la informática para garantizar el honor y la intimidad personal y familiar de los ciudadanos y el pleno ejercicio de sus derechos.” Supports Art. 19, and specifically its rights-holder wording: “Los españoles tienen derecho a elegir libremente su residencia y a circular por el territorio nacional” — against Art. 17(1)'s “Toda persona”. Supports Art. 24(1)-(2), including the right to effective judicial protection without indefensión, and the rights “al Juez ordinario predeterminado por la ley, a la defensa y a la asistencia de letrado, a ser informados de la acusación formulada contra ellos, a un proceso público sin dilaciones indebidas y con todas las garantías, a utilizar los medios de prueba pertinentes para su defensa, a no declarar contra sí mismos, a no confesarse culpables y a la presunción de inocencia”. Supports Art. 24(1) verbatim, including the phrase quoted on the equality-of-arms page: “1. Todas las personas tienen derecho a obtener la tutela efectiva de los jueces y tribunales en el ejercicio de sus derechos e intereses legítimos, sin que, en ningún caso, pueda producirse indefensión.” Supports Art. 53(1) AND 53(2): “1. Los derechos y libertades reconocidos en el Capítulo segundo del presente Título vinculan a todos los poderes públicos. Sólo por ley, que en todo caso deberá respetar su contenido esencial, podrá regularse el ejercicio de tales derechos y libertades, que se tutelarán de acuerdo con lo previsto en el artículo 161, 1, a). 2. Cualquier ciudadano podrá recabar la tutela de las libertades y derechos reconocidos en el artículo 14 y la Sección primera del Capítulo segundo ante los Tribunales ordinarios por un procedimiento basado en los principios de preferencia y sumariedad y, en su caso, a través del recurso de amparo ante el Tribunal Constitucional.” Constitutional text only — no decision of the Tribunal Constitucional, no provision of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal, nothing about any other country.

  3. Ústavní zákon č. 110/1998 Sb., o bezpečnosti České republiky, Čl. 2, 3, 5–12 (Czech original text)

    Poslanecká sněmovna Parlamentu České republiky · Legislation · 1998 · link verified 2026-08-26

    The Czech constitutional act on the security of the Czech Republic, read directly on the Chamber of Deputies' own site. This is the single most useful instrument in this wave for showing that a system can operate several graded emergency regimes with different declaring authorities. Supports Ustavni zakon c. 110/1998 Sb., Cl. 5(1)-(3): “Cl. 5 (1) Vlada muze vyhlasit nouzovy stav v pripade zivelnich pohrom, ekologickych nebo prumyslovych havarii, nehod nebo jineho nebezpeci, ktere ve znacnem rozsahu ohrozuji zivoty, zdravi nebo majetkove hodnoty anebo vnitrni poradek a bezpecnost. (2) Nouzovy stav nemuze byt vyhlasen z duvodu stavky vedene na ochranu prav a opravnenych hospodarskych a socialnich zajmu. (3) Je-li nebezpeci z prodleni, muze vyhlasit nouzovy stav predseda vlady. Jeho rozhodnuti vlada do 24 hodin od vyhlaseni schvali nebo zrusi.”. Supports Ustavni zakon c. 110/1998 Sb., Cl. 6(1): “Čl. 6 (1) Nouzový stav se může vyhlásit jen s uvedením důvodů na určitou dobu a pro určité území. Současně s vyhlášením nouzového stavu musí vláda vymezit, která práva stanovená ve zvláštním zákoně a v jakém rozsahu se v souladu s Listinou základních práv a svobod omezují a které povinnosti a v jakém rozsahu se ukládají. Podrobnosti stanovi zakon.”. Supports Ustavni zakon c. 110/1998 Sb., Cl. 6(2), first sentence: “(2) Nouzový stav se může vyhlásit nejdéle na dobu 30 dnů.”. Supports Ustavni zakon c. 110/1998 Sb., Cl. 6(2), second sentence: “Uvedená doba se může prodloužit jen po předchozím souhlasu Poslanecké sněmovny.”. Supports Ustavni zakon c. 110/1998 Sb., Cl. 6(3): “(3) Nouzový stav končí uplynutím doby, na kterou byl vyhlášen, pokud vláda nebo Poslanecká sněmovna nerozhodnou o jeho zrušení před uplynutím této doby.”. Supports Ustavni zakon c. 110/1998 Sb., Cl. 7: “Čl. 7 (1) Parlament může na návrh vlády vyhlásit stav ohrožení státu, je-li bezprostředně ohrožena svrchovanost státu nebo územní celistvost státu anebo jeho demokratické základy. (2) K přijetí usnesení o vyhlášení stavu ohrožení státu je třeba souhlasu nadpoloviční většiny všech poslanců a souhlasu nadpoloviční většiny všech senátorů.”. Supports Ustavni zakon c. 110/1998 Sb., Cl. 10: “Čl. 10 Jestliže po dobu nouzového stavu, stavu ohrožení státu nebo válečného stavu podmínky na území České republiky neumožní konat volby ve lhůtách, které jsou stanoveny pro pravidelná volební období, lze zákonem lhůty prodloužit, nejdéle však o šest měsíců.”. Supports Ustavni zakon c. 110/1998 Sb., Cl. 3: “Čl. 3 (1) Bezpečnost České republiky zajišťují ozbrojené síly, ozbrojené bezpečnostní sbory, záchranné sbory a havarijní služby. (2) Státní orgány, orgány územních samosprávných celků a právnické a fyzické osoby jsou povinny se podílet na zajišťování bezpečnosti České republiky. Rozsah povinností a další podrobnosti stanoví zákon.”. ENCODING NOTE, recorded because it changes how this record may be used and was found by adversarial review: psp.cz serves these pages in Windows-1250 without a charset declaration that survives an automated fetch, and the excerpts here were first captured with their diacritics stripped, which made a Czech phrase printed on a page unfindable in the record cited for it. The passages this platform quotes have been restored to correct Czech orthography. Any excerpt still shown without diacritics is a transcription of substance rather than a verbatim quotation, and no page quotes one. Cited for the GRADED structure of Czech emergency regimes and for the fact that the declaring authority differs by tier. It records no instance of any regime being declared, states no measure that may be taken under one — those sit in the krizový zákon, cited separately — and supports no claim about any other country.

  4. The Constitution of Japan (日本国憲法), English translation

    Ministry of Justice (Japanese Law Translation database) · Legislation · 1946-11-03 · link verified 2026-07-25

    Cited from the official Japanese Law Translation database, whose stated policy is that translations are reference materials only and that the original Japanese text has sole legal effect. Supports: Article 41 ('The Diet shall be the highest organ of state power, and shall be the sole law-making organ of the State'); Article 76 (the whole judicial power vested in a Supreme Court and in inferior courts established by law; no extraordinary tribunal; all judges independent in the exercise of their conscience and bound by the Constitution and the laws); Article 92 (local self-government — the organisation and operations of local public entities fixed by law in accordance with the principle of local autonomy). Supports the unitary constitutional framework with national law-making and local self-government. The English is not authoritative; any precise legal point rests on the Japanese text. WAVE 20 ADDITION. Read from the same House of Representatives English text. The most important thing about it for this subject is what it does not contain. Supports Constitution of Japan (1946), Art. 54 — and the absence of any emergency chapter: “Article 54. When the House of Representatives is dissolved, there must be a general election of members of the House of Representatives within forty (40) days from the date of dissolution, and the Diet must be convoked within thirty (30) days from the date of the election. When the House of Representatives is dissolved, the House of Councillors is closed at the same time. However, the Cabinet may in time of national emergency convoke the House of Councillors in emergency session. Measures taken at such session as mentioned in the proviso of the preceding paragraph shall be provisional and shall become null and void unless agreed to by the House of Representatives within a period of ten (10) days after the opening of the next session of the Diet.”. Supports Constitution of Japan, Arts. 12 and 13 (cf. Arts. 22, 29 using the same formula): “Article 12. The freedoms and rights guaranteed to the people by this Constitution shall be maintained by the constant endeavor of the people, who shall refrain from any abuse of these freedoms and rights and shall always be responsible for utilizing them for the public welfare. Article 13. All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs.”. Supports Constitution of Japan, Art. 76: “Article 76. The whole judicial power is vested in a Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as are established by law. No extraordinary tribunal shall be established, nor shall any organ or agency of the Executive be given final judicial power. All judges shall be independent in the exercise of their conscience and shall be bound only by this Constitution and the laws.”. Supports Constitution of Japan, Arts. 81 and 98: “Article 81. The Supreme Court is the court of last resort with power to determine the constitutionality of any law, order, regulation or official act. […] Article 98. This Constitution shall be the supreme law of the nation and no law, ordinance, imperial rescript or other act of government, or part thereof, contrary to the provisions hereof, shall have legal force or validity.”. NEGATIVE FINDING, and the one this record exists to carry: the Constitution of Japan contains no emergency chapter and no derogation or suspension clause, so limitation of Chapter III rights runs through the “public welfare” qualifier written into individual articles. It categorically prohibits extraordinary tribunals and carves out no emergency exception to constitutional review. This record supports no claim about proposals to amend the Constitution, and no claim about any other country.WAVE 21 ADDITION. Read from the Japanese Law Translation database's own XML export of the Constitution (s21Ak000010101en3.0.xml), fetched with the law page as referrer, article by article. English is a reference translation only; the Japanese text has legal effect. Supports Art. 12 (“The freedoms and rights guaranteed to the people by this Constitution shall be maintained by the constant endeavor of the people, who shall refrain from any abuse of these freedoms and rights and shall always be responsible for utilizing them for the public welfare”) and Art. 13 (“All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs”) — the public-welfare formula that does the work a limitation clause does elsewhere. Supports Art. 31, 32 and 33 (“No person shall be apprehended except upon warrant issued by a competent judicial officer which specifies the offense with which the person is charged, unless he is apprehended, the offense being committed”). Supports Art. 34 (no arrest or detention without being at once informed of the charges or without the immediate privilege of counsel; no detention without adequate cause, which upon demand of any person must be immediately shown in open court in the person's presence and that of counsel). Supports Art. 35 verbatim: “The right of all persons to be secure in their homes, papers and effects against entries, searches and seizures shall not be impaired except upon warrant issued for adequate cause and particularly describing the place to be searched and things to be seized, or except as provided by Article 33. Each search or seizure shall be made upon separate warrant issued by a competent judicial officer.” Note two textual differences from the United States Fourth Amendment that the pages relying on this record state: Art. 35 does not include “persons” among what is protected, and it adds a separate-warrant requirement that has no American counterpart. Supports Art. 37 (speedy and public trial by an impartial tribunal; full opportunity to examine all witnesses and compulsory process at public expense; competent counsel assigned by the State where the accused cannot secure it). Supports Art. 38 in full: “No person shall be compelled to testify against himself. Confession made under compulsion, torture or threat, or after prolonged arrest or detention shall not be admitted in evidence. No person shall be convicted or punished in cases where the only proof against him is his own confession.” Supports Art. 82: “Trials shall be conducted and judgment declared publicly. Where a court unanimously determines publicity to be dangerous to public order or morals, a trial may be conducted privately, but trials of political offenses, offenses involving the press or cases wherein the rights of people as guaranteed in Chapter III of this Constitution are in question shall always be conducted publicly.” Supports Art. 98(2), that treaties concluded by Japan and established laws of nations shall be faithfully observed. Supports the RIGHTS-HOLDER observation that Chapter III opens for “the people” (Arts. 11-14) while Arts. 31-40 switch to “No person” and “all persons”. VERIFIED NEGATIVE: Art. 38 imposes no duty to inform anyone of the privilege. Constitutional text only — no decision of the Supreme Court of Japan, no provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, nothing about any other country.

  5. Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 (South Africa), ss. 8, 9, 27 and 28

    Government of South Africa (gov.za), Government Gazette No. 24252 · Legislation · 2002 · link verified 2026-08-26

    The Government Gazette text on gov.za, read directly. This is the instrument that shows a system can operate a DISASTER regime and an EMERGENCY regime side by side, with materially different controls. Supports Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002, ss.8, 9 and 27(1): “Establishment 8. (1) A National Disaster Management Centre is established as an institution within which the Minister is responsible. (2) The National Centre forms part of, and functions within, a department of state for the public service. Objective 9. The objective of the National Centre is to promote an integrated and co-ordinated system of disaster management, with special emphasis on prevention and mitigation, by national, provincial and municipal organs of state, statutory functionaries, other role-players involved in disaster management .. Declaration of national state of disaster 27. (1) In the event of a national disaster, the Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, declare a national state of disaster if— (a) existing legislation and contingency arrangements do not adequately provide for the national executive to deal effectively with the disaster; or (b) other special circumstances warrant the declaration of a national state of disaster.”. Supports Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002, ss.27(5) and 28: “(5) A national state of disaster that has been declared in terms of subsection (1)— (a) lapses three months after it has been declared; (b) may be terminated by the Minister by notice in the Gazette before it lapses in terms of paragraph (a); and (c) may be extended by the Minister by notice in the Gazette for one month at a time before it lapses in terms of paragraph (a) or the existing extension is due to expire. .. 28. (1) Each province must establish and implement a framework for disaster management in the province aimed at ensuring an integrated and uniform approach to disaster management in the province by all provincial organs of state, provincial statutory functionaries, non-governmental organisations involved in disaster management in the province and by the private sector. (2) A provincial disaster management framework must be consistent with the provisions of this Act and the national disaster management framework.”. Cited for the existence and shape of a national state of DISASTER as an instrument distinct from a state of EMERGENCY under Constitution s. 37, and for the National Disaster Management Centre's statutory form as an institution within a department. It records no declaration and supports no claim about any other country.

  6. National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 (Cth), ss. 3, 8, 9, 11–15 and 17–18

    Office of Parliamentary Counsel, Federal Register of Legislation (Australia) · Legislation · 2020 · link verified 2026-08-26

    The compiled Commonwealth text on the Federal Register of Legislation, read directly. Supports National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 (Cth), s. 11(1)-(3): “(1) The Governor-General may make a declaration (a national emergency declaration) if the Prime Minister is satisfied that: (a) an emergency has recently occurred, is occurring or is likely to occur (whether in or outside Australia); and (b) the emergency has caused, is causing or is likely to cause nationally significant harm in Australia or in an Australian offshore area; and (c) any of the following subparagraphs apply: (i) the governments of each State and Territory in which the emergency has caused, is causing or is likely to cause nationally significant harm have requested, in writing, the making of the declaration; (ii) because of the emergency, it is not practicable for a request to be made under subparagraph (i); (iii) the emergency has affected, is affecting or is likely to affect Commonwealth interests; (iv) the making of the declaration is appropriate, having regard to the nature of the emergency and the nature and severity of the nationally significant harm; and (d) for reasons relating to emergency management, it is desirable for the declaration to be made for the purposes of one or more national emergency laws. (2) Before the Governor-General makes a national emergency declaration in relation to an emergency, the Prime Minister must consult with the government of each State or Territory (if any) in which the Prime Minister is satisfied the emergency has caused, is causing or is likely to cause nationally significant harm.”. Supports National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 (Cth), s. 11(4)-(5): “(4) A national emergency declaration must: (a) be in writing; and (b) specify: (i) the emergency to which the declaration relates; and (ii) the nature of the emergency and the circumstances that gave rise to it; and (iii) the period for which the declaration is in force. [..] (5) The period specified for the purposes of subparagraph (4)(b)(iii): (a) must not be longer than the period that the Prime Minister considers necessary for the purposes of emergency management; and (b) in any case, must not be longer than 3 months.”. Supports National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 (Cth), s. 12(1), 12(4): “(1) The Governor-General may, in writing, vary a national emergency declaration that relates to an emergency to extend the period for which it is in force (for a further period of up to 3 months) if the Prime Minister is satisfied that: [..] (4) The Governor-General may, under subsection (1), vary a national emergency declaration to extend the period for which it is in force more than once. However, each period of extension must not exceed 3 months.”. Supports National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 (Cth), s. 14: “(1) The Governor-General may, in writing, revoke a national emergency declaration if the Prime Minister is satisfied that, in all the circumstances, it is appropriate to do so. (2) A revocation made under subsection (1) is a legislative instrument, but section 42 (disallowance) of the Legislation Act 2003 does not apply to the revocation.”. Supports National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 (Cth), ss. 15(1)-(2), 16(2), 16(5): “(2) If a national emergency declaration is in force, a responsible Minister for an affected provision may, by legislative instrument, determine that, to the extent that the affected provision relates to a relevant matter: (a) the affected provision is varied as specified in the determination in relation to a period specified in the determination; or (b) the affected provision does not apply in relation to a period specified in the determination; or (c) the affected provision does not apply, and that another provision specified in the determination applies instead, in relation to a period specified in the determination. [..] (2) The Prime Minister may, by written notice, require an accountable authority of a Commonwealth entity to provide specified information to the Prime Minister for the purposes of preparing for, responding to or recovering from an emergency to which the national emergency declaration relates. [..] (5) This section has effect despite any other law of the Commonwealth.”. Supports National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 (Cth), s. 15(8): “(8) This section does not apply to: (a) Part IAA, IAAA, IAAC, IAB, IAC, IC or ID of the Crimes Act 1914; or (b) the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002; or (c) the Australian Federal Police Act 1979; or (d) the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979; or (e) the Intelligence Services Act 2001; or (f) the Surveillance Devices Act 2004; or (g) the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979; or (ga) the Auditor-General Act 1997; [..] (gc) the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011; or (gd) the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1986; or (ge) the National Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2022; (gf) the Ombudsman Act 1976”. Supports National Emergency Declaration Act 2020 (Cth), s. 9: “This Act does not exclude or limit the operation of a law of a State or Territory that is capable of operating concurrently with this Act.”. Cited for the finding that a Commonwealth emergency-modification power can be drafted as a CLOSED LIST of administrative formalities with criminal-procedure, intelligence, surveillance and integrity statutes expressly walled off. It records no declaration, and it supports no claim about State or Territory emergency legislation, none of which was read, or about any other country.

  7. Lei nº 12.608, de 10 de abril de 2012 — Política Nacional de Proteção e Defesa Civil (PNPDEC) e Sistema Nacional de Proteção e Defesa Civil (SINPDEC), Arts. 1º, 6º, 7º, 8º, 10 e 11

    Presidência da República — Casa Civil (Planalto) · Legislation · 2012-04-10 · link verified 2026-08-26

    The authoritative Portuguese text on Planalto, read directly. This is the instrument that separates Brazil's ORDINARY disaster emergency from the constitutional emergency regimes of Arts. 136–141, which are a different subject entirely. Supports Lei nº 12.608, de 10 de abril de 2012, Arts. 1º, 10 and 11 (with CF Arts. 22 XXVIII and 144 §5º): “Art. 10. O SINPDEC é constituído pelos órgãos e entidades da administração pública federal, dos Estados, do Distrito Federal e dos Municípios e pelas entidades públicas e privadas de atuação significativa na área de proteção e defesa civil. […] Art. 11. O SINPDEC será gerido pelos seguintes órgãos: I - órgão consultivo: CONPDEC; II - órgão central, definido em ato do Poder Executivo federal, com a finalidade de coordenar o sistema; III - os órgãos regionais estaduais e municipais de proteção e defesa civil; e IV - órgãos setoriais dos 3 (três) âmbitos de governo.”. Supports Lei nº 12.608/2012, Arts. 6º(VII)(X), 7º(VI)(VII), 8º(VI), and Art. 1º parágrafo único (definitions, as amended by Lei nº 14.750/2023): “Art. 6º Compete à União: […] VII - instituir e manter sistema para declaração e reconhecimento de situação de emergência ou de estado de calamidade pública; […] X - estabelecer critérios e condições para a declaração e o reconhecimento de situações de emergência e estado de calamidade pública; […] Art. 7º Compete aos Estados: […] VI - apoiar a União, quando solicitado, no reconhecimento de situação de emergência e estado de calamidade pública; VII - declarar, quando for o caso, estado de calamidade pública ou situação de emergência; […] Art. 8º Compete aos Municípios: […] VI - declarar situação de emergência e estado de calamidade pública;”. Supports Lei nº 12.608/2012, Art. 8º, VII: “VII - vistoriar edificações e áreas de risco e promover, quando for o caso, a intervenção preventiva e a evacuação da população das áreas de alto risco ou das edificações vulneráveis;”. Cited for the BOTTOM-UP declaration structure of the ordinary disaster emergency and for the composition of SINPDEC. It establishes nothing about the estado de defesa or the estado de sítio, which rest on the Constitution and are cited separately, and supports no claim about any other country.