Emergency Powers and Human Rights Derogations under the Constitutions of Lesotho

Q3 Social Sciences
Hoolo 'Nyane
{"title":"Emergency Powers and Human Rights Derogations under the Constitutions of Lesotho","authors":"Hoolo 'Nyane","doi":"10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15732","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Constitutions worldwide occasionally reach moments of public emergency when deviation from the ordinary normative framework is inevitable. To regulate the exercise of public power even during such moments, constitutions have provisions for emergencies and derogation from the normative frameworks. The Constitution of Lesotho is no exception. Section 21, read with section 23, provides both procedural and substantive requirements for the use of emergency powers and derogation from human rights. This constitutional framework exists alongside other pieces of legislation, such as the Public Health Order of 1970, the Emergency Powers Order of 1988 and the Disaster Management Act of 1997. These pieces of legislation, except the Disaster Management Act, predate the Constitution. Hence, they are not in harmony with the Constitution. The two recent incidences of using emergency powers – the 2020 coronavirus-induced state of emergency and the 2022 recall of parliament state of emergency. These two incidences laid bare two problems relating to the emergency powers regime in Lesotho. Firstly, there is no harmony between the Constitution and pieces of legislation relevant to the use of emergency powers. Secondly, the jurisprudence of the superior courts on the subject is still underdeveloped. The purpose of this article is to critically analyse the constitutional and legislative framework for exercising emergency powers and human rights derogation in Lesotho.","PeriodicalId":55857,"journal":{"name":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","volume":"100 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15732","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Constitutions worldwide occasionally reach moments of public emergency when deviation from the ordinary normative framework is inevitable. To regulate the exercise of public power even during such moments, constitutions have provisions for emergencies and derogation from the normative frameworks. The Constitution of Lesotho is no exception. Section 21, read with section 23, provides both procedural and substantive requirements for the use of emergency powers and derogation from human rights. This constitutional framework exists alongside other pieces of legislation, such as the Public Health Order of 1970, the Emergency Powers Order of 1988 and the Disaster Management Act of 1997. These pieces of legislation, except the Disaster Management Act, predate the Constitution. Hence, they are not in harmony with the Constitution. The two recent incidences of using emergency powers – the 2020 coronavirus-induced state of emergency and the 2022 recall of parliament state of emergency. These two incidences laid bare two problems relating to the emergency powers regime in Lesotho. Firstly, there is no harmony between the Constitution and pieces of legislation relevant to the use of emergency powers. Secondly, the jurisprudence of the superior courts on the subject is still underdeveloped. The purpose of this article is to critically analyse the constitutional and legislative framework for exercising emergency powers and human rights derogation in Lesotho.
《莱索托宪法》规定的紧急权力和克减人权
世界各地的宪法偶尔会遇到公共紧急时刻,此时不可避免地会偏离普通的规范框架。为了规范公共权力的行使,即使在这种情况下,宪法也规定了紧急情况和对规范框架的克减。《莱索托宪法》也不例外。与第23节一起解读的第21节规定了使用紧急权力和克减人权的程序性和实质性要求。这一宪法框架与其他立法一起存在,如1970年的《公共卫生令》、1988年的《紧急权力令》和1997年的《灾害管理法》。除《灾害管理法》外,这些立法早于《宪法》。因此,它们不符合宪法。最近两次使用紧急权力的事件——2020年冠状病毒引发的紧急状态和2022年议会召回紧急状态。这两起事件暴露了与莱索托紧急权力制度有关的两个问题。首先,《宪法》与有关使用紧急权力的立法之间不协调。其次,我国高等法院在这一问题上的法理尚不完善。本文的目的是批判性地分析在莱索托行使紧急权力和克减人权的宪法和立法框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: PELJ/PER publishes contributions relevant to development in the South African constitutional state. This means that most contributions will concern some aspect of constitutionalism or legal development. The fact that the South African constitutional state is the focus, does not limit the content of PELJ/PER to the South African legal system, since development law and constitutionalism are excellent themes for comparative work. Contributions on any aspect or discipline of the law from any part of the world are thus welcomed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信