A/HRC/13/30 same provisions, i.e. it must not be arbitrary, and must be based on grounds and procedures established by law (para. 1), information of the reasons must be given (para. 2) and court control of the detention must be available (para. 4) as well as compensation in the case of a breach (para. 5). And if, in addition, criminal charges are brought in such cases, the full protection of article 9 (2) and (3), as well as article 14, must also be granted. 71. The former Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights sponsored an excellent study completed in 2005 with the report of the expert Emmanuel Decaux (E/CN.4/2006/58), which proposes 20 draft principles governing the administration of justice through military tribunals, of which No. 5 provides that “military courts should, in principle, have no jurisdiction to try civilians. In all circumstances, the State shall ensure that civilians accused of a criminal offence of any nature are tried by civilian courts”; Principle No. 8 adds that “the jurisdiction of military courts should be limited to offences of a strictly military nature committed by military personnel. Military courts may try persons treated as military personnel for infractions strictly related to their military status”; Principle No. 9 specifies that “in all circumstances, the jurisdiction of military courts should be set aside in favour of the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts to conduct inquiries into serious human rights violations such as extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances and torture, and to prosecute and try persons accused of such crimes”; and No. 12 stresses that under the guarantee of habeas corpus, “in all circumstances, anyone who is deprived of his or her liberty shall be entitled to take proceedings, such as habeas corpus proceedings, before a court, in order that that court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his or her detention and order his or her release if the detention is not lawful. The right to petition for a writ of habeas corpus or other remedy should be considered as a personal right, the guarantee of which should, in all circumstances, fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the ordinary courts. In all circumstances, the judge must be able to have access to any place where the detainee may be held”. C. States of emergency 72. The Working Group has found that whenever a State has declared a state of emergency arbitrarily or in a manner contrary to the provisions of article 4 of the Covenant, it has seriously affected the right to liberty of person and guarantees of a fair trial embodied in articles 7 to 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 2, paragraph 3, and articles 9, 10 and 14 of the Covenant. It has therefore informed the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Council that the strengthening of public powers to the benefit of those who declare the state of emergency has negative repercussions. It has done so in its reports E/CN.4/1994/27 (paras. 60, 61 and 72); E/CN.4/1995/31 (paras. 38, 56 and 57); E/CN.4/1996/40 (para. 124); A/HRC/4/40 (para. 6); and A/HRC/7/4 (paras. 40, 59, 61, 63 to 69, 78 and 82). 73. The Working Group agrees with the Human Rights Committee that the restoration of a state of normalcy where full respect for the Covenant can again be secured must be the predominant objective of a State party derogating from the Covenant (general comment No. 29 on derogations during a state of emergency, paragraph 1). It is the understanding of the Working Group that a declaration of a state of emergency (sometimes called state of siege, state of alert, martial law, etc.) must fulfil the following criteria: exceptional circumstances (it must not concern a structural situation, such as endemic poverty); legality (it must involve an emergency in a State based on the rule of law); duration (it may not be renewed indefinitely, as has been done in a number of cases which have come to the Group’s attention, in which it has been prolonged for 28 or even 46 consecutive years); seriousness (its sole purpose must be for dealing with an event which has placed the “life of the nation” at risk, and no other lesser circumstance); necessity (the situation which must be addressed cannot be corrected by other means); publicity (there are no de facto states of emergency, 20 GE.10-10294