The Legal Framework for Declaring a State of Emergency in the Jordanian and Iraqi Constitutional Systems

Abstract

The study aims to examine the legal provisions governing one of the applications of the doctrine of necessity in the Jordanian and Iraqi constitutions and the deficiencies therein. The researcher employs a comparative critical-analytical approach and concluds with several key and pivotal findings regarding the shortcomings in the constitutional organization of the legal system governing states of emergency and martial law. This exceptional legal system grants the executive authority the absolute right to unilaterally declare a state of emergency without any involvement from the legislative body, either in its initiation or termination. This stands in contrast to the Iraqi constitutional approach, which assigns a constitutional role to the legislative body in determining the necessity of resorting to this exceptional legal system, thereby highlighting the weakness of parliamentary oversight in such cases as an application of the doctrine of necessity in constitutional law. The study also recommends that the Jordanian constitutional legislator should amend certain provisions related to the legal framework governing states of emergency to align with the appropriate procedures for invoking them.