File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1017/asjcl.2016.2
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85009444695
- Find via
Supplementary
-
Citations:
- Scopus: 0
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Prototype Constitutional Supervision in China: The Lessons of the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee
Title | Prototype Constitutional Supervision in China: The Lessons of the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2015 |
Publisher | Walter de Gruyter GmbH. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/asjcl |
Citation | Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 2015, v. 10 n. 2, p. 323-342 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Recurrent proposals to establish a constitutional supervisory committee have been pertinaciously rejected in spite of widespread recognition of the Chinese Constitution’s ineffectiveness. And yet, the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee has long epitomized in practice a prototypic form of constitutional supervision. Vested with quasi-judicial competences, the Committee seemed destined for a central role under the “One Country, Two Systems” arrangement. The tight secrecy imposed on its proceedings and the suppression of its potential to act consistently and with a distinct identity have fatally undermined the Committee’s ability to modulate constitutional tensions by way of coordinating expectations of the Basic Law’s proper meaning. The experience of the Basic Law Committee reveals the recalcitrance of the Party-state toward constitutional interpretation by any specialized body, even one whose powers are heavily circumscribed and whose membership is tightly controlled. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/233888 |
ISSN |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Ip, Eric C. | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2016-09-29T03:15:45Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2016-09-29T03:15:45Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2015 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 2015, v. 10 n. 2, p. 323-342 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2194-6078 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/233888 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Recurrent proposals to establish a constitutional supervisory committee have been pertinaciously rejected in spite of widespread recognition of the Chinese Constitution’s ineffectiveness. And yet, the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee has long epitomized in practice a prototypic form of constitutional supervision. Vested with quasi-judicial competences, the Committee seemed destined for a central role under the “One Country, Two Systems” arrangement. The tight secrecy imposed on its proceedings and the suppression of its potential to act consistently and with a distinct identity have fatally undermined the Committee’s ability to modulate constitutional tensions by way of coordinating expectations of the Basic Law’s proper meaning. The experience of the Basic Law Committee reveals the recalcitrance of the Party-state toward constitutional interpretation by any specialized body, even one whose powers are heavily circumscribed and whose membership is tightly controlled. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | Walter de Gruyter GmbH. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/asjcl | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Asian Journal of Comparative Law | - |
dc.title | Prototype Constitutional Supervision in China: The Lessons of the Hong Kong Basic Law Committee | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.email | Ip, Eric C.: ericcip@hku.hk | - |
dc.identifier.authority | Ip, Eric C.=rp02161 | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1017/asjcl.2016.2 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85009444695 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 10 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 2 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 323 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 342 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 1932-0205 | - |