Download Free Role Of The Court Of Final Appeal Of The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Under Chinas One Country Two Systems Principle Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Role Of The Court Of Final Appeal Of The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Under Chinas One Country Two Systems Principle and write the review.

This book discusses the basic theories and structures employed in handling the Central-SAR relationship under the “One Country, Two Systems” policy from the perspective of ruling by law. It also explores the fundamental principles and methods used in the division of powers between the central authorities and the SARs, and investigates the institutions responsible for handling the Central-SAR relationship and their practices. Further, it presents case studies since 1997 to help readers better understand the Central-SAR relationship. Lastly, the author raises some new questions for readers who want to further study this topic.
Although the formula of “One Country, Two Systems” has been implemented since 1997, it is still controversial in terms of the role of Hong Kong's final authority on judicial review under China's sovereignty. On the one hand, the power of final adjudication is vested in the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) in Hong Kong according to the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). On the other hand, under China's sovereignty, the constitutional role of the Hong Kong court in solving issues relating to Central Authorities within its jurisdiction is still controversial. This constitutional tension has been seen in many cases, for example in HKSAR v. David Ma Wai-Kan. This article examines the nature of Hong Kong's final authority on judicial review and its relationship with the NPCSC's authority over the interpretation of the Basic Law. It reveals that, in the context of Hong Kong under “One Country, Two Systems,” a dual structure of constitutional review has been formed: one is the judicial review of the Basic Law by Hong Kong courts at the regional level, and the other is the constitutional control of the Basic Law by the NPCSC at the national level. Furthermore, it suggests that each one should take a deferential approach so that a balance can be struck between “One Country” and “Two Systems.” In addition, it is necessary to develop some public channels to effectuate the mutual deference mechanism by showing their respective positions. To a certain extent, FG Hemisphere Associates LLC v. Democratic Republic of the Congo and Others has shown that such a mechanism is possible as Hong Kong's final authority on judicial review based on “Two Systems” is more likely to be reconciled with China's sovereignty backed by “One Country.”
Explores judicial independence, integrity and impartiality in Asia-Pacific 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.
Constitutions worldwide inevitably have 'invisible' features: they have silences and lacunae, unwritten or conventional underpinnings, and social and political dimensions not apparent to certain observers. The Invisible Constitution in Comparative Perspective helps us understand these dimensions to contemporary constitutions, and their role in the interpretation, legitimacy and stability of different constitutional systems. This volume provides a nuanced theoretical discussion of the idea of 'invisibility' in a constitutional context, and its relationship to more traditional understandings of written versus unwritten constitutionalism. Containing a rich array of case studies, including discussions of constitutional practice in Australia, Canada, China, Germany, Hong Kong, Israel, Italy, Indonesia, Ireland and Malaysia, this book will look at how this aspect of 'invisible constitutions' is manifested across different jurisdictions.
NA.
When Britain and China negotiated the future of Hong Kong in the early 1980s, their primary concern was about maintaining the status quo. The rise of China in the last thirty years, however, has reshaped the Beijing-Hong Kong dynamic as new tensions and divisions have emerged. Thus, post-1997 Hong Kong is a case about a global city’s democratic transition within an authoritarian state. The Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Hong Kong introduces readers to these key social, economic, and political developments. Bringing together the work of leading researchers in the field, it focuses on the process of transition from a British colony to a Special Administrative Region under China’s sovereign rule. Organized thematically, the sections covered include: ‘One Country, Two Systems’ in practice Governance in post-colonial Hong Kong Social mobilization The changing social fabric of Hong Kong society Socio-economic development and regional integration The future of Hong Kong. This book provides a thorough introduction to Hong Kong today. As such, it will be invaluable to students and scholars of Hong Kong’s politics, culture and society. It will also be of interest to those studying Chinese political development and the impact of China’s rise more generally.
In the FG Hemisphere case, Hong Kong courts were faced with a decision on whether to enforce an arbitral award against a sovereign state, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, despite the objections of the Central Government of the People's Republic of China. The central government argued that the executive, not the courts, should have the final word on whether Hong Kong should adopt an absolute or restrictive approach to sovereign immunity. The Hong Kong government also argued that, under the Hong Kong Basic Law, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (CFA) had no power to decide, but should submit the issue to the National People's Congress Standing Committee. In an unprecedented decision, the CFA agreed to submit the case.Within this debate lay fundamental differences in how to understand the nature of law and China's sovereignty over Hong Kong under the “one country, two systems” regime. This Article analyses this debate over the appropriate rules of recognition and highlights differences in approach among Hong Kong judges, and between the judges and Mainland authorities. It argues that the theory of executive power finally articulated by a majority of the CFA is fundamentally different from the theories advanced in the United States or the United Kingdom, which the CFA sought to use as precedent. This Article then discusses possible repercussions of the case.