Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Po Jen Yap, Constitutional Dialogue in Common Law Asia (Oxford University Press, 2015)†

Po Jen Yap, Constitutional Dialogue in Common Law Asia (Oxford University Press, 2015)† 1024 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW [Vol. 64 p o Jen Yap , c onstitutionaL d iaLoGue in c ommon Lwa a sia (Oxford University Press, 2015)† Reviewed by Yvonne Tew* Over the last two decades, scholars have theorized new models of constitutional review that avoid conferring on the courts the final word on constitutional understandings. Scholars have identi- fied this form of constitutionalism variously as the “Commonwealth 1 2 model of constitutionalism,” “weak-form judicial review,” the “par- 3 4 liamentary bill of rights model,” and “dialogic judicial review.” Discussions of this model of review, however, have focused primarily on Commonwealth systems in the West—such as Canada, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, the Australian Capital Territory, and the State of Victoria in Australia—with little attention paid to Asia. Po Jen Yap’s new book, Constitutional Dialogue in Common Law Asia, fills this void by exploring a dialogic model of judicial review in three Asian common law systems: Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore. Yap argues that dialogic review is the most attractive approach to constitutional review, both normatively and pragmatically, and his work raises thought-provoking questions about the extent to which the dialogic model is the “constitutional ideal” for these http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Comparative Law Oxford University Press

Po Jen Yap, Constitutional Dialogue in Common Law Asia (Oxford University Press, 2015)†

American Journal of Comparative Law , Volume 64 (4) – Dec 1, 2016

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/po-jen-yap-constitutional-dialogue-in-common-law-asia-oxford-NC814FdIeK
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author [2017]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Comparative Law. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
ISSN
0002-919X
eISSN
2326-9197
DOI
10.1093/ajcl/avw016
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

1024 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW [Vol. 64 p o Jen Yap , c onstitutionaL d iaLoGue in c ommon Lwa a sia (Oxford University Press, 2015)† Reviewed by Yvonne Tew* Over the last two decades, scholars have theorized new models of constitutional review that avoid conferring on the courts the final word on constitutional understandings. Scholars have identi- fied this form of constitutionalism variously as the “Commonwealth 1 2 model of constitutionalism,” “weak-form judicial review,” the “par- 3 4 liamentary bill of rights model,” and “dialogic judicial review.” Discussions of this model of review, however, have focused primarily on Commonwealth systems in the West—such as Canada, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, the Australian Capital Territory, and the State of Victoria in Australia—with little attention paid to Asia. Po Jen Yap’s new book, Constitutional Dialogue in Common Law Asia, fills this void by exploring a dialogic model of judicial review in three Asian common law systems: Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore. Yap argues that dialogic review is the most attractive approach to constitutional review, both normatively and pragmatically, and his work raises thought-provoking questions about the extent to which the dialogic model is the “constitutional ideal” for these

Journal

American Journal of Comparative LawOxford University Press

Published: Dec 1, 2016

There are no references for this article.