Presents a comprehensive new text on administrative law in Hong Kong; discusses judicial review, administrative tribunals, the Ombudsman and subsidiary legislation.
This book investigates judicial deference to the administration in judicial review, a concept and legal practice that can be found to a greater or lesser degree in every constitutional system. In each system, deference functions differently, because the positioning of the judiciary with regard to the separation of powers, the role of the courts as a mechanism of checks and balances, and the scope of judicial review differ. In addition, the way deference works within the constitutional system itself is complex, multi-faceted and often covert. Although judicial deference to the administration is a topical theme in comparative administrative law, a general examination of national systems is still lacking. As such, a theoretical and empirical review is called for. Accordingly, this book presents national reports from 15 jurisdictions, ranging from Argentina, Canada and the US, to the EU. Constituting the outcome of the 20th General Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law, held in Fukuoka, Japan in July 2018, it offers a valuable and unique resource for the study of comparative administrative law.
This book explores legal and constitutional issues in Hong Kong's relationship with mainland China through an analysis of the litigation on the right of abode of the children of Hong Kong residents who are born and live in the mainland. The litigation in the Hong Kong courts and the subsequent interpretation by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress were followed with keen interest both locally and internationally, and had provoked great controversy. The differing approaches to and styles of interpretation of the Court and the Standing Committee provide a vivid demonstration of the clash of legal systems within which Hong Kong's constitutional system has to operate. These issues are discussed in this book by Hong Kong's leading legal scholars and practitioners. This book offers perspectives to solve these controversies and to develop an acceptable approach to the interpretation of the Basic Law. It captures the sustained public debate on constitutional issues and provides a historical record of this constitutional debate. It also contains the full texts of the decision of the Court and the Interpretation by the Standing Committee.
This book is the first in the world to provide a cross-national, comparative exploration of omnibus legislation. It contributes to the global debate over omnibus legislation and offers comprehensive, thorough and multifaceted coverage that concerns the fields of legislation and legisprudence, comparative law, political science, public policy and economics. Beyond its relevance for these fields, the book will support practitioners in parliaments, governments and courts, thereby impacting the actual use of omnibus legislation. A new, major and controversial reform is enacted in the middle of the night. It is buried in a massive omnibus bill hundreds of pages in length, which is rammed through the legislative process at breakneck speed. The legislators receive the final version of the bill in the very last minute, and protest that they’ve had no opportunity to read it in detail and know what they’re voting upon. The majority party’s legislative leaders, however, are unimpressed, and the law is eventually passed on the basis of strict party discipline. Though it may sound far-fetched, this scenario is all too familiar in many legislatures around the world. The legislative practice of combining numerous unrelated measures in one long bill, which is often passed via a highly expedited process, has become a matter of intense debate and criticism in many countries.
In the years since it was established on 1 July 1997, Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal has developed a distinctive body of new law and doctrine with the help of eminent foreign common law judges. Under the leadership of Chief Justice Andrew Li, it has also remained independent under Chinese sovereignty and become a model for other Asian final courts working to maintain the rule of law, judicial independence and professionalism in challenging political environments. In this book, leading practitioners, jurists and academics examine the Court's history, operation and jurisprudence, and provide a comparative analysis with European courts and China's other autonomous final court in Macau. It also makes use of extensive empirical data compiled from the jurisprudence to illuminate the Court's decision-making processes and identify the relative impacts of the foreign and local judges.
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 review of elections and the electoral process in a specific Asian jurisdiction, including Common Law Asia, namely Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, and Singapore, as well as jurisdictions in Civil Law Asia, namely Indonesia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. It fills a gap in the literature by addressing a central challenge to democratic governance, namely the problem of partisan self-dealing in the electoral processes. By exploring the constantly evolving role of the courts in addressing pivotal constitutional questions, this book will be of interest to students and scholars of Asian Law, Governance and Politics.