{"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":" ","pages":""},"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.
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.