Perpetual States of Emergency: A Familiar Script
A decade has passed since Tunisia first implemented a state of emergency following a 2015 suicide bombing. Originally a provisional response to a terror attack targeting presidential guards, these sweeping powers, which allow for heightened surveillance and restrictions on assembly, have been renewed without effective challenge under successive administrations, including that of President Kais
Saied. The initial incident claimed a reported 12 lives, providing the immediate pretext for measures now entrenched in Tunisian law for 120 consecutive months. This prolonged state of exception is hardly unique. Consider the United States, which, post-9/11, enacted the PATRIOT Act, a law originally intended as temporary but largely made permanent, vastly expanding government surveillance powers.
Similarly, France maintained its state of emergency for two years after the 2015 Paris attacks, only to then weave many of those emergency provisions directly into ordinary law, illustrating a pattern where temporary security concerns morph into permanent curbs on civil liberties. The framing is always one of urgent necessity, yet the duration and scope often become indistinguishable from routine
governance, transforming temporary powers into an enduring legal framework. The receipts confirm that what begins as an 'emergency' often becomes the new normal, especially in nations grappling with internal and external pressures. Such indefinite states allow governments to sidestep normal legislative processes and accountability, subtly shifting the balance of power towards the executive. This