http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-2.xsd
Constitutional dialogue in common law Asia
Constitutional dialogue is a distinct form of institutional interaction whereby the pursuit of legislative goals can be constructively altered, but not foreclosed, by judicial input into the lawmaking process. Even though the respective constitutions of Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore do not provide for structural devices that enable the local legislatures to reverse a constitutional decision, except via a constitutional amendment, their courts can and do apply dialogic canons of interpretation that can foster a debate with the political branches of government. Dialogic review is also more politically efficacious in common law Asia as each of the three territories has been governed by the same ruling party or coalition since decolonization and will continue to be so governed for the foreseeable future. Where the judiciary operates within a constitutional system dominated by a semi-permanent party or coalition in government, the pursuit of dialogic review is also the political expedient way for courts to engage in a valuable but less confrontational colloquy with the political institutions on the requisites of a constitutional democracy. In making a case, the book draws on the history and constitutional frameworks of Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore; and explores how dialogic review can be applied to four core constitutional concerns: freedom of expression, freedom of religion, right to equality, and criminal due process rights.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Law - Africa, Asia, Pacific & Antarctica
Oxford, United Kingdom : Oxford University Press, [2015]