Fool Me Twice? Past abuse of emergency provisions and the constitutional lessons learnt

By studying examples from Chile (1976-1988), India (1975-1977) and Germany (1933-1945), this paper will seek to understand four aspects: the relevant legislation that facilitated the imposition of the state of emergency, the circumstances and immediate consequences of the state of emergency imposed, subsequent lessons learnt, if any, by the successor governments to the respective emergency regimes, and if these lessons have actually made a difference – with a particular spotlight being shone on the reactions of the judicial and legislative branches in the respective countries. The purpose of this contribution is to shine a light on the risks posed to democracies through the abuse of emergency provisions, understand the common tactics used by putative autocratic regimes and what safeguards have failed in the past – and which ones have been adopted in reaction to past experiences of dictatorship.