‘It is a Little Known Legal Fact’: Originalism, Customary Human Rights Law and Constitutional Interpretation

13 Pages Posted: 4 Apr 2011

See all articles by Li-ann Thio

Li-ann Thio

National University of Singapore (NUS) - Faculty of Law

Date Written: December 2010

Abstract

The judicial approach towards constitutional interpretation, in attributing meaning to words in the constitutional text, illumines judicial self-understanding of institutional competence, how the separation of powers animates or constrains judicial review, and where the fount of judicial legitimacy lies. Since appeals to the Privy Council ceased in 1994, Singapore public law has been judicially developed along autochthonous lines, consonant with the “fundamental values of Singapore society” which are “communitarian” in orientation, serving the “common good”.

Despite past practice requiring that the Constitution be “primarily” interpreted “within its own four walls, and not in the light of analogies” from foreign jurisdictions, Singapore courts have not evinced a nationalist isolationism but have regularly evaluated comparative constitutional cases, which are merely persuasive in value, as models or anti-models. The courts have distinctively rejected English decisions which have developed along a rights-expansive trajectory under the influence of the European Convention of Human Rights, in a manner endemic to liberal constitutionalism, where powers are construed narrowly and rights, broadly. In an age of globalization and transnational judicial conversations, Singapore courts increasingly have to evaluate international law-based arguments in adjudicating rights; in this, there has been a sea change from a culture of resistance, even hostility, as seen in the peremptory dismissal of such arguments, to a skilled and thorough engagement with customary human rights law, of which the recent Court of Appeal decision of Yong Vui Kong v. Public Prosecutor is exemplary.

Suggested Citation

Thio, Li-ann, ‘It is a Little Known Legal Fact’: Originalism, Customary Human Rights Law and Constitutional Interpretation (December 2010). Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, pp. 558-570, December 2010, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1802666

Li-ann Thio (Contact Author)

National University of Singapore (NUS) - Faculty of Law ( email )

469G Bukit Timah Road
Eu Tong Sen Building
Singapore, 259776
Singapore

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
2
Abstract Views
1,311
PlumX Metrics