Dyzenhaus makes the argument that the Gross’ Extra-Legal Model is fundamentally flawed for the reason being that it crucial that the rule of law is upheld. Moreover, Dyzenhaus maintains that Gross did not understand the definition of the rule of law. Accordingly, I intend on showing that there is credibility in Dyzenhaus’ argument as he delineates the mechanisms of the rule of law. I agree with Dyzenhaus argument that government should "respond to emergency situations… in a way that complies with the rule of law." In order to show this legitimacy, I will divide my argument into three different subdivisions. First, I discuss the legality model and distinguish why it is an adequate model to explain the role of the government in a state emergency. Subsequently, I discuss Dyzenhaus criticism of Gross. Finally, I argue that the Legality Measure model is substantiated because it grants a point of political
Dyzenhaus makes the argument that the Gross’ Extra-Legal Model is fundamentally flawed for the reason being that it crucial that the rule of law is upheld. Moreover, Dyzenhaus maintains that Gross did not understand the definition of the rule of law. Accordingly, I intend on showing that there is credibility in Dyzenhaus’ argument as he delineates the mechanisms of the rule of law. I agree with Dyzenhaus argument that government should "respond to emergency situations… in a way that complies with the rule of law." In order to show this legitimacy, I will divide my argument into three different subdivisions. First, I discuss the legality model and distinguish why it is an adequate model to explain the role of the government in a state emergency. Subsequently, I discuss Dyzenhaus criticism of Gross. Finally, I argue that the Legality Measure model is substantiated because it grants a point of political