Wikipedia (it's on the internet it must be true
) defines Martial Law as= "
Martial law is the temporary imposition of direct military control of normal civil functions or suspension of civil law by a government, especially in response to a temporary emergency where civil forces are overwhelmed, or in an
occupied territory."
Part of that definition comes from Britannica - "
Martial law, temporary rule by military authorities of a designated area in time of emergency when the civil authorities are deemed unable to function. The legal effects of a declaration of martial
law differ in various jurisdictions, but they generally involve a suspension of normal
civil rights and the extension to the civilian population of summary military
justice or of
military law. "
But then they go on to say, " In the English legal system, the term is of dubious significance; in the words of the English jurist
Sir Frederick Pollock, “so-called ‘martial law,’ as distinct from military law, is an unlucky name for the justification by the
common law of acts done by necessity for the defence of the Commonwealth when there is
war within the realm.”
From an American Historical point of view, there have been many instances of using military forces to restore of maintain order. These could easily be called Martial law events but civilian control remained, so they were more about manpower than the actual suspension of civil courts and laws.
There have also been incidents where the military was truly the temporary government, including Reconstruction in the post civil war south, Hawaii after the Pearl Harbor attack, Oklahoma during oil over production in 1931 and even to some extent, Washington D.C. on September 11, 2001.
In other parts of the world we see many examples of martial law, including the American occupations of Germany and Japan after the end of WWII.
Or China government forces in Tiananmen Square in 1989.
Martial Law can be kind of fuzzy to define.