File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Government-Sponsored Religious Education in Hong Kong after the Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong v. Secretary for Justice

TitleGovernment-Sponsored Religious Education in Hong Kong after the Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong v. Secretary for Justice
Authors
KeywordsLaw and religion
Hong Kong law
Religious education
Church and state
Issue Date2014
PublisherOxford University Press.
Citation
Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, 2014, v. 3 n. 2, p. 340-346 How to Cite?
AbstractThis comment critically examines an important landmark case decided by the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong v Secretary for Justice, which defined the relationship between the church and state in Hong Kong. Specifically, this Comment highlights the court’s problematic interpretation of article 143(3) of the Basic Law, which, while attempting to reach a pragmatic compromise between preserving the government’s flexibility to modify existing educational policy and safeguarding the freedom of religious organizations, is nevertheless inconsistent with the text. This comment also discusses the implications of the case on the state establishment of religion.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/197674
ISSN
SSRN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChurk, SS-
dc.contributor.authorChen, J-
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-29T08:39:10Z-
dc.date.available2014-05-29T08:39:10Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.citationOxford Journal of Law and Religion, 2014, v. 3 n. 2, p. 340-346-
dc.identifier.issn2047-0770-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/197674-
dc.description.abstractThis comment critically examines an important landmark case decided by the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong v Secretary for Justice, which defined the relationship between the church and state in Hong Kong. Specifically, this Comment highlights the court’s problematic interpretation of article 143(3) of the Basic Law, which, while attempting to reach a pragmatic compromise between preserving the government’s flexibility to modify existing educational policy and safeguarding the freedom of religious organizations, is nevertheless inconsistent with the text. This comment also discusses the implications of the case on the state establishment of religion.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherOxford University Press.-
dc.relation.ispartofOxford Journal of Law and Religion-
dc.subjectLaw and religion-
dc.subjectHong Kong law-
dc.subjectReligious education-
dc.subjectChurch and state-
dc.titleGovernment-Sponsored Religious Education in Hong Kong after the Catholic Diocese of Hong Kong v. Secretary for Justiceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailChen, J: jianlin@hku.hk-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ojlr/rwu008-
dc.identifier.hkuros232537-
dc.identifier.spage340-
dc.identifier.epage346-
dc.publisher.placeUK-
dc.identifier.ssrn2420681-
dc.identifier.hkulrp2013/047-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats