Abstract:
The study investigates and entails a crossed analysis of the legal and
constitutional processes through which a state of emergency and a state of siege
are brought into being within the contexts of Cameroon and South Africa. In both
countries, a presidential act is required to enforce these institutions. However, the
significant fact is that the status and the legal regime of such an act are different
and lead to some major consequences on human rights and the rule of law. In the
case of Cameroon, the presidential act declaring a state of emergency or a state of
siege is an Act of state whereas in the case of South Africa, it is an Act of Parliament.
The latter is subject to judicial review and parliamentary appreciation
whereas the former is linked to the idea of raison d’état and is a completely presidential
matter.
