File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: From Legal Pluralism to Dual State: Evolution of the Relationship Between the Chinese and Hong Kong Legal Orders

TitleFrom Legal Pluralism to Dual State: Evolution of the Relationship Between the Chinese and Hong Kong Legal Orders
Authors
KeywordsChina
Hong Kong
Legal pluralism
Dual state
Issue Date2022
PublisherBerkeley Electronic Press.
Citation
Law & Ethics of Human Rights, , v. 16 n. 1, p. 99-135 How to Cite?
AbstractThis article provides the first-ever comprehensive analysis of how the relationship between the Chinese and Hong Kong legal orders has morphed in nature since China’s resumption of sovereignty over Hong Kong in 1997. It argues that the relationship has evolved from a form of legal pluralism found in the European Union to a monist but bifurcated system—to a “dual state,” to borrow from Ernst Fraenkel’s theory. Recent events, including Beijing’s imposition of a national security law on Hong Kong and its overhaul of Hong Kong’s election methods, have consolidated that evolution. The analysis herein not only enables us to make sense of the developments in the China-Hong Kong relationship, but has five wider theoretical implications. First, it suggests a way of distinguishing a dual state from a fully liberal legal system. Second, it discerns the similarities and differences between legal pluralism and dual state. Third, it connects the literature on theories of legal order and that on the dual state. Fourth, it clarifies the relationship between theories of legal order and regime types. Finally, Hong Kong’s experience reveals the challenges of and potential mechanisms for maintaining liberal values in an authoritarian regime.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/310589
ISSN
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.242

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChan, CSW-
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-07T07:58:54Z-
dc.date.available2022-02-07T07:58:54Z-
dc.date.issued2022-
dc.identifier.citationLaw & Ethics of Human Rights, , v. 16 n. 1, p. 99-135-
dc.identifier.issn1938-2545-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/310589-
dc.description.abstractThis article provides the first-ever comprehensive analysis of how the relationship between the Chinese and Hong Kong legal orders has morphed in nature since China’s resumption of sovereignty over Hong Kong in 1997. It argues that the relationship has evolved from a form of legal pluralism found in the European Union to a monist but bifurcated system—to a “dual state,” to borrow from Ernst Fraenkel’s theory. Recent events, including Beijing’s imposition of a national security law on Hong Kong and its overhaul of Hong Kong’s election methods, have consolidated that evolution. The analysis herein not only enables us to make sense of the developments in the China-Hong Kong relationship, but has five wider theoretical implications. First, it suggests a way of distinguishing a dual state from a fully liberal legal system. Second, it discerns the similarities and differences between legal pluralism and dual state. Third, it connects the literature on theories of legal order and that on the dual state. Fourth, it clarifies the relationship between theories of legal order and regime types. Finally, Hong Kong’s experience reveals the challenges of and potential mechanisms for maintaining liberal values in an authoritarian regime.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherBerkeley Electronic Press.-
dc.relation.ispartofLaw & Ethics of Human Rights-
dc.rightsLaw & Ethics of Human Rights. Copyright © Berkeley Electronic Press.-
dc.subjectChina-
dc.subjectHong Kong-
dc.subjectLegal pluralism-
dc.subjectDual state-
dc.titleFrom Legal Pluralism to Dual State: Evolution of the Relationship Between the Chinese and Hong Kong Legal Orders-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailChan, CSW: corachan@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityChan, CSW=rp01296-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1515/lehr-2022-2004-
dc.identifier.hkuros331787-
dc.identifier.volume16-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage99-
dc.identifier.epage135-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats