What Is the Legal Definition of a Crisis

(n) `training` means the specific training that may be necessary to enable disaster relief workers to provide professional mental health advice to victims of a major disaster or its consequences. Middle English crisis, crisis, borrowed from Latin crisis “judgment, critical stage”, borrowed from Greek krãsis “act of separation, decision, judgment, event, result, turn, sudden change”, from kri-, variant of krä”Ìno “to separate, choose, decide, judge” + -sis, suffix, which forms the names of the action or process – more to a certain input 1 To call something a crisis means, formulate a problem as an urgent structural threat that requires urgent action to avoid danger. Since the threat is structural, this means that the current status quo is not a sufficient way to deal with the threat. Another approach is needed. For example, after 9/11, Attorney General Ashcroft invoked this narrative when he claimed that the 9/11 attacks “confronted us with a new enemy and demanded that we rethink and act to protect our citizens and our values.” [1] Such discourse creates what I will call a dislocation: a break or gap in a particular narrative. Discursively, the crisis delegitimizes the narrative with which reality has been previously described. The discursive vacuum must be filled by a discourse presented as something new and as a solution to the crisis. [2] Image at the service of law; Art and/as/of power, power and/as/art. Gavin Keeney, Ishita Jain and Harsh Bhavsar offer in their contribution, which disrupts classification and definition both conceptually and practically (article? Photo essay? Multimedia project?), propose a deconstruction – when something that can only be constructed in the process of deconstruction can be deconstructed – of art law and the art of law, the rules of the “art-academic industrial complex”, The eternal crisis – philosophical, physical, textual, imaginary – in the legal experience of the artist. Point, emergency, emergency, contingency, pincer, strait (or strait) crisis means a critical or decisive moment or state of affairs. Juncture emphasizes the coincidence or significant convergence of events. An important point in the history of our country is the pressure of restrictions or the urgency of demands arising from a particular situation. Requirements provisions Emergency applies to a sudden and unforeseen situation that requires immediate action to avert a disaster.

The presence of mind required to deal with emergencies implies an emergency or necessity that is considered possible, but uncertain in its occurrence. Pinch contingency plans involves urgency or pressure to act to a lesser extent than emergency or emergency. Passing through a strait, which today is often located in a strait, applies to a difficult situation from which it is extremely difficult to escape. In Dire Straits, the crisis applies to a point whose outcome will make a decisive difference. A crisis of confidence The crisis seems to be everywhere. Economic crises, environmental crises, armed violence crises, national security crises abound. This article focuses on the importance of calling something a “crisis” and argues that crisis discourse is a key factor in hegemonic change. In what follows, I will support my claim that crisis discourses can lead to hegemonic changes by explaining how crisis discourse creates a break in an existing discourse, a rupture that creates space for alternative discourses. In addition, I will discuss what I mean by hegemonic change, and I will argue that the crisis discourse is not only about politicians and the executive, but also about the judiciary and how the legal discourse is maintained and modified. I conclude that further research is needed to understand how the judiciary is involved in crisis discourse and hegemonic change, and to understand the implications this has for the judicial role in democracy and the rule of law. [3] “Crisis” can be expressed in many ways and does not even necessarily require the use of the word “crisis”.

What is needed, as mentioned above, is to postulate a structural threat that can only be overcome by a new non-status quo approach. Hamdi v. The Rumsfeld case was heard by US courts between 2002 and 2008. An analysis of the discourse of the case documents from the three levels at which this case was heard shows evidence of a crisis discourse that was present in the deliberations of the courts, as well as evidence that this discourse created a rift filled with a new counterterrorism discourse. [7] In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted the fundamental idea that “comprehensive protection” that applies in other environments might be “impractical and inadequate” in times of current crisis. [8] Thus, the crisis discourse succeeded in creating a distortion, which was eventually filled with a military-preventive anti-terrorist approach. The COVID-19 pandemic – the archetype, the perfect crisis, which in turn produces a spread of crises – highlights this interrelationship between law and crisis in many ways (front: the front of something – of what?).

As always, the global manifests itself in the local, the local in the individual. The more individual the reflection on crises, the more local it is, the greater its universal and paradigmatic meaning. Two articles in this issue focus on local developments in Australia. Francine Rochford analyzes a municipal decision to “lockdown” as well as the arrest of a person who posted a message on Facebook calling for the violation of restrictions. After digging up the legal framework, Rochford shows how the government`s statements and actions were based on an elaborate manipulation of language and image to discursively create “crisis” and legitimize the repressive action of the state: the law of law and language, the law of power. Vincent Goding discusses the Australian system of subsidies to employers, drawing on a philosophical examination of the “exception” in the work of Schmitt and Agamben: the exception is the place of the final assertion of the sovereignty of the law; By becoming the exception, the crisis becomes the norm of law. Goding shows how the system represented an extraordinary mechanism designed to restore and maintain the existing neoliberal order, despite the political narrative of extraordinary social policies that accompanied it. This crisis of definition and meaning leads to a disruption of our sense of how the law/crisis of institutions, texts, interpretations, practices, body, mind, planet can be understood in terms of judgment, decision, evolution, danger, change. How to think of the life of the mind, the transformations of the body, a disease that takes hold of the world, the language of art and violence, the institutions and discourses of power, the text, the weapon, the enormity of rain and the sun and the changing seasons in terms of these essential, constitutive and impossible links of law and crisis? The authors of this issue of JGLR offer us some answers, perhaps, but above all criteria, crises, criticisms. Justice: Balance by law, beyond law. To do justice to a person, to a people, to a moment, to a text, to all these texts.

Is that possible? Judging a text, as a reader, interpreter, publisher? Writing such an editorial means being both liberated and restricted, both freed from the terror of writing and trapped by the terror of rewriting. In other words (other people`s words? your own?) free from the burden of forming ideas, weighed down by other people`s ideas. No matter how I try to reshape (reform?) it in my own structure and interpretation, to create a clear flow from one contribution to another, to identify and connect themes, to move from one statement to another as on a series of flat stones over a stream – each step an equilibrium number, a crisis avoids a crisis – the lyrics defy interpretation, Oppose this command, protest against the humiliation of summons and paraphrasing. But even beyond this subliminal impossibility of doing justice to the text, the themes paraphrased and forcibly excerpt also resist my efforts for order and order. There is no order except in circles, repetitions, choruses. early 15th century, from the Latinized form of the Greek krisis “turning in a disease” (used as such by Hippocrates and Galen), literally “judgment, test result, selection”, from krinein “to separate, decide, judge”, from the root PIE *krei- “seven, to distinguish, distinguish” (source also from the Greek krinesthai “to explain”; Old English hriddel “sieve”; Latin cribrum “sieve”, crimen “judgment, crime”, cernere (past participle certus) “seven, distinguish, separate”; Old Irish criathar, Old Welsh cruitr “sieve”; Middle Irish crich “border, border”).