You may have to register before you can download all our books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
In a comprehensive examination of the constitutional systems of Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore, Po Jen Yap contributes to a field that has traditionally focussed on Western jurisdictions. Drawing on the history and constitutional framework of these Asian law systems, this book examines the political structures and traditions that were inherited from the British colonial government and the major constitutional developments since decolonization. Yap examines the judicial crises that have occurred in each of the three jurisdictions and explores the development of sub-constitutional doctrines that allows the courts to preserve the right of the legislature to disagree with the courts' decisions using the ordinary political processes. The book focusses on how these novel judicial techniques can be applied to four core constitutional concerns: freedom of expression, freedom of religion, right to equality, and criminal due process rights. Each chapter examines one core topic and defends a model of dialogic judicial review that offers a compelling alternative to legislative or judicial supremacy.
Drawing on the history and constitutional framework of the constitutional systems of Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore, this book examines the political structures and traditions that were inherited from the British colonial government and the major constitutional developments since decolonization.
This edited volume is a timely and insightful contribution to the growing discourses on public law in Asia. Surveying many important jurisdictions in Asia including mainland China, Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan, the book addresses recent developments and experiences in the field of public interest litigation. The book offers a comparative perspective on public law, asking crucial questions about the role of the state and how private citizens around Asia have increasingly used the forms, procedures and substance of public law to advance public and political aims. In addition to addressing specific jurisdictions in Asia, the book includes a helpful and introduction that highlights regional trends in Asia. In the jurisdictions profiled, transnational public interest litigation trends have commingled with local dynamics. This volume sheds light on how that commingling has produced both legal developments that cut across Asian jurisdictions as well as developments that are unique to each of the jurisdictions studied.
Many jurisdictions in Asia have vested their courts with the power of constitutional review. Traditionally, these courts would invalidate an impugned law to the extent of its inconsistency with the constitution. In common law systems, such an invalidation operates immediately and retrospectively; and courts in both common law and civil law systems would leave it to the legislature to introduce corrective legislation. In practice, however, both common law and civil law courts in Asia have devised novel constitutional remedies, often in the absence of explicit constitutional or statutory authorisation. Examining cases from Hong Kong, Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, and the Philippines, this collection of essays examines four novel constitutional remedies which have been judicially adopted - Prospective Invalidation, Suspension Order, Remedial Interpretation, and Judicial Directive - that blurs the distinction between adjudication and legislation.
Explains why the constitutional jurisprudence of Hong Kong, Taiwan, and South Korea is converging, and provides analysis of relevant case law.
In the past century, Asian nations have experienced a wave of democratisation as countries in the region have gained independence or transitioned from authoritarian military rule towards more participatory politics. At the same time, there has been an expansion of judicial power in Asia, whereby new courts or empowered old ones emerge as independent constraints on governmental authority. This is the first book to assess the judicial review of elections in Asia. It provides important insights into how Asian courts can strategically engage with the political actors in their jurisdictions and contribute to a country’s democratic discourse. Each chapter in the book sheds light on the judicial ...
This is the first book that focusses on how proportionality analysis - a legal transplant from the West - is applied by courts around Asia, and it explores how a country's commitment to democracy and the rule of law is fundamental to the success of the doctrine's judicial enforcement. This book will appeal to lawyers, political scientists, and students of law and political science who seek to understand how proportionality analysis is blossoming and, in some cases, flourishing in Asia.
This book illuminates how law and politics interact in the judicial doctrines and explores how democracy sustains and is sustained by the exercise of judicial power.
Explores how proportionality analysis - a legal transplant from the West - is judicially enforced by courts around Asia.
Many jurisdictions in Asia have vested their courts with the power of constitutional review. Traditionally, these courts would invalidate an impugned law to the extent of its inconsistency with the constitution. In common law systems, such an invalidation operates immediately and retrospectively; and courts in both common law and civil law systems would leave it to the legislature to introduce corrective legislation. In practice, however, both common law and civil law courts in Asia have devised novel constitutional remedies, often in the absence of explicit constitutional or statutory authorisation. Examining cases from Hong Kong, Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, and the Philippines, this collection of essays examines four novel constitutional remedies which have been judicially adopted - Prospective Invalidation, Suspension Order, Remedial Interpretation, and Judicial Directive - that blurs the distinction between adjudication and legislation.