![martial law rules martial law rules](https://www.goyimtv.tv/f_data/data_userfiles/user_media/1015439723/t/3499643086/0.jpg)
![martial law rules martial law rules](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uviQxg0EEHE/UFw7xppZp6I/AAAAAAAAFes/-_BfXmh-sA4/s1600/Martial+Law.jpg)
Through an account of the formalization of emergency laws, it explains the effects of colonial bureaucracies of security upon independent regimes seeking legitimacy as new democracies by tracing decisions regarding the use of an inherited arsenal of colonial and settler-colonial practices of security laws for population management, particularly mobility restrictions, surveillance and political control. The article offers an organizational vantage point from which to understand the development of population-classification practices in terms of an ‘axis of suspicion’ that conflates ‘political risk’ with ‘security risk’. Examining Israel’s new Counter-Terrorism Law against the backdrop of security legislation in India, its main proposition is that these laws and their effects are rooted in colonial emergency regulations and the bureaucratic mechanisms for population control developed therein, rather than in the ‘global war on terror’. This article traces the historical foundations of current security legislation as the matrix of citizenship. Building on these scholarly insights into the colonial past, this contribution investigates, first, how an inherited bureaucratic arsenal of emergency mechanisms was institutionalized in two distinct regimes of political membership and, second, the effects of the transformation of the bureaucratic repertoire into formal legislation on the legitimacy of using colonial security technologies against civilians in a manner that effectively changes the scope of their citizenship. Yet scholarship has already established that the global war on terror did not produce exceptional methods of policing and state violence (Berda, 2013 Li, 2018 Neocleous, 2007), but rather used existing emergency practices rooted in colonial laws, alongside militant counterinsurgency, to classify, subdue and criminalize dissent (Hussain, 2007 Tomlins, 2006). Contemporary analyses often focus on 9/11 and the global war on terror as the point of departure for the current stripping of rights by security laws (Brooks, 2004).