top of page
  • Writer's pictureSam Wilks

Emergency Powers and Their Abuse: Investigating the misuse of emergency powers by governments, which often leads to the erosion of legal norms.

In the contemporary discourse on governance and the wielding of authority, a critical examination of emergency powers and their deployment by governments has become increasingly pertinent. This analysis, drawing upon the intellectual traditions of legal philosophy, economics, psychology, and security, seeks to illuminate the contours of this issue. It delves into the dynamics of how, under the guise of exigency, governments overstep established legal norms, subsequently leaning on the sluggish pace of judicial processes to legitimise actions that would otherwise have been deemed egregious overreaches.

The essence of emergency powers lies in their inherent capacity to expedite governmental responses during crises. However, this expedience often comes at a steep price: the erosion of meticulously established legal and constitutional safeguards designed to protect individual freedoms and maintain a balance of power. The Queensland High Court's judgement declaring certain COVID emergency mandates as unlawful serves as a poignant illustration of this phenomenon. This verdict not only underscores the tension between swift governmental action and adherence to legal frameworks but also highlights the broader implications of such overreach.

Australia, with its nuanced legal and governmental structure, offers fertile ground for exploring the misuse of emergency powers. The Northern Territory, in particular, has witnessed instances where the invocation of emergency powers has stirred controversy, raising questions about the balance between public health and safety and the preservation of civil liberties. The Northern Territory's response to health crises, for instance, has seen the implementation of stringent measures that, while aimed at protecting public health, evidently killed many through iatrogenic deaths and have sparked debates over their legality and proportionality.

From an economic perspective, the works of luminaries in the field suggest that the unchecked expansion of government powers, even under emergency pretences, leads to inefficiencies and distortions in the market. The principles of free enterprise and minimal government intervention, cherished by economists, are often sidelined in the rush to enact sweeping measures, leading to long-term repercussions on economic freedom and individual autonomy.

Psychological insights into authority, compliance, and the human propensity for obedience under duress further enrich our understanding of the situation. The readiness with which emergency measures are accepted by the public, often without scrutiny, underscores the delicate interplay between fear, security, and freedom. The invocation of emergency powers plays directly into this psychological dynamic, leveraging the inherent human instinct for safety to justify expansive governmental control.

Security specialists, with their pragmatic focus on threat assessment and mitigation, contribute another layer of complexity to the discourse. The trade-offs between security measures and personal freedoms are starkly evident in the realm of emergency powers, where the imperative for safety can lead to the normalisation of surveillance, restrictions on movement, and other invasive practices that, once instituted, are difficult to roll back.

Personality theorists provide insights into how individual differences in cognition, emotion, and behaviour may influence perceptions and reactions to governmental overreach. The diversity in individual responses to authority and threat, shaped by personality traits, highlights the variability in public acceptance or resistance to emergency measures.

In synthesising these diverse perspectives, it becomes evident that the misuse of emergency powers by governments, exemplified by the Queensland High Court's judgement, is not merely an issue of legal overreach. The case from the Northern Territory, among others, serves as a real-world example of the delicate balance that must be navigated between the imperatives of crisis management and the preservation of fundamental freedoms.

The crux of the matter lies in ensuring that emergency powers, while necessary in certain contexts, are exercised within a framework that prioritises transparency, accountability, and proportionality. The challenge is to devise mechanisms that allow for swift and effective responses to crises without sacrificing the legal and ethical standards that underpin democratic governance. However, unless those in the health bureaucracy, the government, and those directly responsible for imposing the mandates are held to account, some for the crime of medical manslaughter, then the loss of trust, the lack of credibility for all those involved will remain for decades to come. We will never forget, never forgive, and never allow this to happen again.


The scrutiny of emergency powers and their potential for abuse is a critical endeavour that requires a multidisciplinary approach. The Queensland Court's judgement serves as a cautionary tale, reminding us of the imperative to guard against the encroachment of governmental power on individual liberties. As societies navigate the complexities of contemporary crises, the lessons drawn from examining these dynamics are invaluable in ensuring that the response to emergencies does not become a pretext for undermining the very foundations of legal and democratic order. Eventually those responsible will need to be held to account insome way or another, otherwise, it is reasonable given the over 60,000 excess deaths in Australia that individuals will take retribution into their own hands, and with so many Australians affected, law enforcement will have little chance to stop it. Australians have already observed the cowardly state-controlled thugs weaken at the knees by Palestinian protestors promoting terrorism and the genocide of Jews. There are far more survivors with justifiable grievances.

From the author.

The opinions and statements are those of Sam Wilks and do not necessarily represent whom Sam Consults or contracts to. Sam Wilks is a skilled and experienced Security Consultant with almost 3 decades of expertise in the fields of Real estate, Security, and the hospitality/gaming industry. His knowledge and practical experience have made him a valuable asset to many organizations looking to enhance their security measures and provide a safe and secure environment for their clients and staff.

3 views0 comments


bottom of page