首页> 外文期刊>International journal of constitutional law >Statutory rights and de facto constitutional supremacy in Hong Kong?
【24h】

Statutory rights and de facto constitutional supremacy in Hong Kong?

机译:香港的法定权利和事实上的宪法至上?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Fundamental rights in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Hong Kong) are protected in its Basic Law and the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (BORO). The Hong Kong Basic Law enshrines most of the BORO rights, thereby expressly conferring constitutional status on these rights. But there are a number of BORO rights that are not protected in the Basic Law. This article analyzes the cases in which the Hong Kong judiciary has addressed disputes concerning three exclusive BORO rights: (i) the right to participate in public affairs; (ii) the right to a fair hearing in civil cases; and (iii) the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. We will also explain how the courts have conferred de facto constitutional supremacy on all these statutory rights, while simultaneously providing significant leeway and decisional space for the government to craft a considered response in their remedial legislation, thereby promoting a constitutional dialogue between the judiciary and the government on rights-protection in Hong Kong.
机译:香港特别行政区(香港)的基本权利受到《基本法》和《香港人权法案条例》(BORO)的保护。 《香港基本法》包含了《人权法》的大部分权利,从而明确赋予这些权利以宪法地位。但是,《基本法》并未保护许多《人权法》权利。本文分析了香港司法机构处理的有关BORO三种专有权利的纠纷:(i)参与公共事务的权利; (ii)在民事案件中享有公平听证的权利; (iii)禁止残忍,不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚。我们还将说明法院如何赋予所有这些法定权利事实上的宪法至上性,同时为政府在其补救性立法中做出深思熟虑的反应提供巨大的回旋余地和决策空间,从而促进司法机关与司法机关之间的宪法对话。香港维权政府。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号