Kevin Y.L. Tan – författare

This book presents a timely assessment of the impact of history, politics and economics in shaping the Singapore Constitution, going beyond the descriptive narrative, the authors will cast a critical eye over the developments of the last 40 years.

This book presents a timely assessment of the impact of history, politics and economics in shaping the Singapore Constitution, going beyond the descriptive narrative, the authors will cast a critical eye over the developments of the last 40 years.

This book analyses the unique constitutional system in operation in Thailand as a continuous process of bricolage between various Western constitutional models and Buddhist doctrines of Kingship. Reflecting on the category of 'constitutional monarchy’ and its relationship with notions of the rule of law, it investigates the hybridised semi-authoritarian, semi-liberal monarchy that exists in Thailand. By studying constitutional texts and political practices in light of local legal doctrine, the book shows that the monarch's affirmation of extraordinary prerogative powers strongly rests on wider doctrinal claims about constitutionalism and the rule of law. This finding challenges commonly accepted assertions about Thailand, arguing that the King's political role is not the remnant of the 'unfinished' borrowing of Western constitutionalism, general disregard for the law, or cultural preference for 'charismatic authority', as generally thought. Drawing on materials and sources not previously available in English, this important work provides a comprehensive and critical account of the Thai ‘mixed constitutional monarchy’ from the late 19th century to the present day.

This volume addresses the idea of origins, how things are formed, and how they relate to their present and future in terms of ‘constitution-making’ which is a continuous process in South Asian states. It examines the drafting, nature, core values and roles of the first modern constitutions during the founding of the eight modern nation-states in South Asia. The book looks at the constitutions of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. It provides an explanatory description of the process and substantive inputs in the making of the first constitutions of these nations; it sets out to analyse the internal and external (including intra-regional) forces surrounding the making of these constitutions; and it sets out theoretical constructions of models to conceptualise the nature and role of the first constitutions (including constituent documents) in the founding of the modern nation-states and their subsequent impact on state-building in the region.

This new book in the Constitutionalism in Asia series considers the idea of origins, and of change and continuity in terms of ‘constitution-making’, which is an on-going process in the Northeast Asian states.The book examines the drafting, nature, core values, and roles of the first modern constitutions during the founding of the 8 modern states/territories in Northeast Asia: China (1949), Taiwan (1947), Hong Kong SAR (1997), Macau SAR (1999), Japan (1889), North Korea (1948 and 1972), South Korea (1948), and Mongolia (1924).The collection provides:- an exploratory description of the process and substantive inputs in the making of the first constitutions of these nations/territories;- analysis of the internal and external (including intra-regional) forces surrounding the making of these constitutions; and- theoretical construction of models to conceptualise the nature and role of the first constitutions (including constituent documents) in the founding of the modern nation-states/territories and their subsequent impact on state-building in the region.

This volume addresses the idea of origins, how things are formed, and how they relate to their present and future in terms of ‘constitution-making’ which is a continuous process in South Asian states. It examines the drafting, nature, core values and roles of the first modern constitutions during the founding of the eight modern nation-states in South Asia. The book looks at the constitutions of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. It provides an explanatory description of the process and substantive inputs in the making of the first constitutions of these nations; it sets out to analyse the internal and external (including intra-regional) forces surrounding the making of these constitutions; and it sets out theoretical constructions of models to conceptualise the nature and role of the first constitutions (including constituent documents) in the founding of the modern nation-states and their subsequent impact on state-building in the region.

This volume focuses on the making, nature, and role of the first modern constitutions at the founding of the modern nation-states in Southeast Asia. These historical essays add richly to our understanding and appreciation of the founding moments and to the theory and practice of constitutionalism in these states. This volume makes three significant contributions. First, it helps plug the wide knowledge gap in comparative constitutional history in Southeast Asia. Second, it furthers our understanding of contemporary constitutional practice and also anticipates possible developmental trajectories in light of the foundational values embedded in and manifested through these constitutions. Third, through the comparative historical study of these early constitutions, plausible theoretical insights may be gained to further our understanding of Southeast Asia’s constitutional history. The book is essential reading for those wishing to obtain a deeper understanding of the constitutional foundings of Southeast Asia.

This book analyses the unique constitutional system in operation in Thailand as a continuous process of bricolage between various Western constitutional models and Buddhist doctrines of Kingship. Reflecting on the category of 'constitutional monarchy’ and its relationship with notions of the rule of law, it investigates the hybridised semi-authoritarian, semi-liberal monarchy that exists in Thailand. By studying constitutional texts and political practices in light of local legal doctrine, the book shows that the monarch's affirmation of extraordinary prerogative powers strongly rests on wider doctrinal claims about constitutionalism and the rule of law. This finding challenges commonly accepted assertions about Thailand, arguing that the King's political role is not the remnant of the 'unfinished' borrowing of Western constitutionalism, general disregard for the law, or cultural preference for 'charismatic authority', as generally thought. Drawing on materials and sources not previously available in English, this important work provides a comprehensive and critical account of the Thai ‘mixed constitutional monarchy’ from the late 19th century to the present day.

This new book in the Constitutionalism in Asia series considers the idea of origins, and of change and continuity in terms of ‘constitution-making’, which is an on-going process in the Northeast Asian states.The book examines the drafting, nature, core values, and roles of the first modern constitutions during the founding of the 8 modern states/territories in Northeast Asia: China (1949), Taiwan (1947), Hong Kong SAR (1997), Macau SAR (1999), Japan (1889), North Korea (1948 and 1972), South Korea (1948), and Mongolia (1924).The collection provides:- an exploratory description of the process and substantive inputs in the making of the first constitutions of these nations/territories;- analysis of the internal and external (including intra-regional) forces surrounding the making of these constitutions; and- theoretical construction of models to conceptualise the nature and role of the first constitutions (including constituent documents) in the founding of the modern nation-states/territories and their subsequent impact on state-building in the region.

This book assesses territorial governance (that is, all forms of subnational governance) as a constitutional artefact in five Southeast Asian countries - Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, and Thailand. Starting with the linked ideas of localism and subsidiarity, the argument is that these states have used various forms of subsidiarity for dealing with ethnic and religious pluralism and the social diversity for which Southeast Asia is especially noted. Territorial governance mechanisms discussed range from decentralisation to special regional autonomy, federalism, and local government, including village autonomy. A silent revolution has occurred in which our view of these states as highly centralised ‘developmental states’ is in need of serious modification. Southeast Asia, the book argues, presents a high degree of originality in the framing of territorial governance.

This book assesses territorial governance (that is, all forms of subnational governance) as a constitutional artefact in five Southeast Asian countries - Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, and Thailand. Starting with the linked ideas of localism and subsidiarity, the argument is that these states have used various forms of subsidiarity for dealing with ethnic and religious pluralism and the social diversity for which Southeast Asia is especially noted. Territorial governance mechanisms discussed range from decentralisation to special regional autonomy, federalism, and local government, including village autonomy. A silent revolution has occurred in which our view of these states as highly centralised ‘developmental states’ is in need of serious modification. Southeast Asia, the book argues, presents a high degree of originality in the framing of territorial governance.

This book presents an in-depth interrogation of the theory and application of the Basic Structure Doctrine in the Federation of Malaysia.The Basic Structure Doctrine, famously introduced in the 1973 Indian Supreme decision of Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala AIR – which held that certain core or fundamental features in the Constitution of India could not be amended by Parliament even if it met all procedural requirements – was initially rejected when it was first argued in Malaysia in the 1975 case of Loh Kooi Choon v Government of Malaysia and lay dormant for the next three decades.Judicial winds shifted in 2010 when Malaysia’s apex court, the Federal Court, cited Kesavananda with approval in the case of Sivarasa Rasiah v Badan Peguam Malaysia & Anor, and observed that it was ‘clear from the way in which the Federal Constitution is constructed that there are certain features that constitute its basic fabric’ and that ‘any statute (including one amending the Constitution) that offends the basic structure may be struck down as unconstitutional.’ In a quick succession of cases, the Federal Court cemented this doctrine in Malaysia’s jurisprudence and deployed it to defend the court’s judicial power. These widely-publicised cases generated much debate beyond the legal fraternity and judiciary and often polarised different sectors of Malaysian society.This collection of essays responds to this extremely important debate on the limits of constitutional amendments as a form of constitution-making in Malaysia by considering the theory behind the Basic Structure Doctrine and critically examining how it has been harnessed by the Federal Court and by other political actors – most notably Islamists and secularists; and royalists and republicans – on the ground.

This book presents an in-depth interrogation of the theory and application of the Basic Structure Doctrine in the Federation of Malaysia.The Basic Structure Doctrine, famously introduced in the 1973 Indian Supreme decision of Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala AIR – which held that certain core or fundamental features in the Constitution of India could not be amended by Parliament even if it met all procedural requirements – was initially rejected when it was first argued in Malaysia in the 1975 case of Loh Kooi Choon v Government of Malaysia and lay dormant for the next three decades.Judicial winds shifted in 2010 when Malaysia’s apex court, the Federal Court, cited Kesavananda with approval in the case of Sivarasa Rasiah v Badan Peguam Malaysia & Anor, and observed that it was ‘clear from the way in which the Federal Constitution is constructed that there are certain features that constitute its basic fabric’ and that ‘any statute (including one amending the Constitution) that offends the basic structure may be struck down as unconstitutional.’ In a quick succession of cases, the Federal Court cemented this doctrine in Malaysia’s jurisprudence and deployed it to defend the court’s judicial power. These widely-publicised cases generated much debate beyond the legal fraternity and judiciary and often polarised different sectors of Malaysian society.This collection of essays responds to this extremely important debate on the limits of constitutional amendments as a form of constitution-making in Malaysia by considering the theory behind the Basic Structure Doctrine and critically examining how it has been harnessed by the Federal Court and by other political actors – most notably Islamists and secularists; and royalists and republicans – on the ground.

This book of text, cases and materials from Asia is designed for scholars and students of constitutional law and comparative constitutional law. The book is divided into 11 chapters, arranged thematically around key ideas and controversies, enabling the reader to work through the major facets of constitutionalism in the region. The book begins with a lengthy introduction that critically examines the study of constitutional orders in 'Asia', highlighting the histories, colonial influences, and cultural particularities extant in the region. This chapter serves both as a provisional orientation towards the major constitutional developments seen in Asia – both unique and shared with other regions – and as a guide to the controversies encountered in the study of constitutional law in Asia. Each of the following chapters is framed by an introductory essay setting out the issues and succinctly highlighting critical perspectives and themes. The approach is one of 'challenge and response', whereby questions of constitutional importance are posed and the reader is then led, by engaging with primary and secondary materials, through the way the various Asian states respond to these questions and challenges. Chapter segments are accompanied by notes, comments and questions to facilitate critical and comparative analysis, as well as recommendations for further reading.The book presents a representative range of Asian materials from jurisdictions including: Bangladesh, China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, South Korea, Sri Lanka , Taiwan, Timor-Leste and the 10 ASEAN states.

Singapore’s Constitution was hastily cobbled together after her secession from the Federation of Malaysia in 1965. In the subsequent 50 years, the Constitution has been amended many times to evolve a Constitution like no other in the world. Outwardly, Singapore has a Westminster-type constitutional democracy, with an elected legislature, fundamental liberties and safeguards to ensure the independence of the judiciary. On closer inspection, the Constitution displays many innovative and unusual characteristics. Most notable among them are the various types of Members of Parliament that have been introduced since the mid-1980s, the office of the Elected President and the fact that there is no constitutional right to property. This volume seeks to explain the nature and context of these constitutional innovations in the context of a pluralistic, multi-ethnic state obsessed with public order and security. The volatile racial mix of Singapore, with its majority Chinese population nestled in a largely Malay/Islamic world, compels the state to search for ethnic management solutions through the Constitution to guarantee to the Malays and other ethnic minorities their status in the polity. In addition, it examines how the concept of the rule of law is perceived by the strong centrist state governed by a political party that has been in power since 1959 and continues to hold almost hegemonic power.