Proclamation of Emergency
There may be justifications for abandoning Article 19 under Article 358 throughout a state of emergency based on war or extrinsic hostility but restricting motions to the court for anything other than Article 19 (but apart from Articles 20 and 21) and abandoning backlog court hearings cannot be substantiated at any expense. According to Article 358, Article 359 could perhaps have remained limited to the cessation of Article 19 implementation solely in the event of a war or external attack, not in the event of a financial crisis or an armed insurrection. Especially within the Right Against Exploitation, Article 21-A Right to Education, and Articles 23 and 24, namely, Prohibition of Human Trafficking and Coerced Labour, and Prevention of Child Labour, are prohibited. Can therefore Article 359 be justifiable in such a situation?
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.