Comparative Reflections on COVID-19 Responses: Drafting, Powers, and Interpretation

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Thomas Yeon
{"title":"Comparative Reflections on COVID-19 Responses: Drafting, Powers, and Interpretation","authors":"Thomas Yeon","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmab009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines comparatively approaches in Hong Kong and English law on powers created by the use of subordinate legislations to combat the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspectives of legislative drafting and statutory interpretation. These powers, being wide and flexible in nature, pose a tension between two competing concerns. On the one hand, they enable law enforcement officers to be able to deal with the unique challenges posed by a public health crisis. On the other hand, they pose the potential to restrict fundamental human rights disproportionately. This article will proceed in three parts. First, the article will analyse the responsibilities of drafters in drafting subordinate legislations and the techniques therein; the discussion will be contextualized within a need for urgent public health responses to combat the pandemic. Second, the powers conferred upon law enforcement officers and restrictions on individual liberty under Hong Kong law and English law will be analysed. Third, approaches to interpreting the relevant legislations under the two jurisdictions will be examined. It will be argued that despite the need to confer wide and flexible powers to the executive to combat the pandemic, specificity of language and precision in articulating these powers remain of cardinal and overarching importance.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/slr/hmab009","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statute Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmab009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article examines comparatively approaches in Hong Kong and English law on powers created by the use of subordinate legislations to combat the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspectives of legislative drafting and statutory interpretation. These powers, being wide and flexible in nature, pose a tension between two competing concerns. On the one hand, they enable law enforcement officers to be able to deal with the unique challenges posed by a public health crisis. On the other hand, they pose the potential to restrict fundamental human rights disproportionately. This article will proceed in three parts. First, the article will analyse the responsibilities of drafters in drafting subordinate legislations and the techniques therein; the discussion will be contextualized within a need for urgent public health responses to combat the pandemic. Second, the powers conferred upon law enforcement officers and restrictions on individual liberty under Hong Kong law and English law will be analysed. Third, approaches to interpreting the relevant legislations under the two jurisdictions will be examined. It will be argued that despite the need to confer wide and flexible powers to the executive to combat the pandemic, specificity of language and precision in articulating these powers remain of cardinal and overarching importance.
COVID-19应对措施的比较思考:起草、权力和解释
摘要本文从立法起草和法律解释的角度,比较了香港和英国在应对新冠肺炎疫情中运用从属立法创造权力的做法。这些权力本质上广泛而灵活,在两种相互竞争的关切之间造成了紧张关系。一方面,它们使执法人员能够应对公共卫生危机带来的独特挑战。另一方面,它们有可能不成比例地限制基本人权。本文将分三部分进行。首先,本文将分析下属立法起草人员的职责及其起草技巧;讨论将在需要采取紧急公共卫生对策以防治这一流行病的背景下进行。其次,分析香港法律和英国法律赋予执法人员的权力和对个人自由的限制。第三,探讨两地有关法例的解释方法。有人认为,尽管有必要赋予行政部门广泛和灵活的权力以防治这一流行病,但明确表述这些权力的语言和准确性仍然具有根本和压倒一切的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The principal objectives of the Review are to provide a vehicle for the consideration of the legislative process, the use of legislation as an instrument of public policy and of the drafting and interpretation of legislation. The Review, which was first established in 1980, is the only journal of its kind within the Commonwealth. It is of particular value to lawyers in both private practice and in public service, and to academics, both lawyers and political scientists, who write and teach within the field of legislation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信