Kirjahaku

Public health law has been a subject of much controversy and contestation, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out. This timely book inquires into the foundational principles of a form of public health law that takes seriously the inherent dignity of the human person. Written from a multidisciplinary perspective, this illuminating study makes the case that the rule of law, just as much as population health, is an essential determinant of human well-being. Choosing the case of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, where life expectancy is among the highest in the world, yet whose well-established rule of law tradition is oft perceived to be under strain, in describing the central dilemmas of public health law, it makes an original contribution to our knowledge of comparative public health law and public health ethics. Situating Hong Kong’s public health law in the context of global health, The Law and Regulation of Public Health should appeal across the world to students and scholars of public health, medical law, public law, comparative law, and international law. It accessibly explains the law to epidemiologists and public health policymakers, and public health to jurists and legal practitioners. This book lucidly urges professionals of public health and law to reflect on how the myriad legal instruments and legal institutions should best be used to promote and protect public health in ways that are at once ethical and lawful. It is a must read for anyone who is interested in gaining insights into public health law and regulation in this highly internationalised Chinese Special Administrative Region.

Public health law has been a subject of much controversy and contestation, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out. This timely book inquires into the foundational principles of a form of public health law that takes seriously the inherent dignity of the human person. Written from a multidisciplinary perspective, this illuminating study makes the case that the rule of law, just as much as population health, is an essential determinant of human well-being. Choosing the case of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, where life expectancy is among the highest in the world, yet whose well-established rule of law tradition is oft perceived to be under strain, in describing the central dilemmas of public health law, it makes an original contribution to our knowledge of comparative public health law and public health ethics. Situating Hong Kong’s public health law in the context of global health, The Law and Regulation of Public Health should appeal across the world to students and scholars of public health, medical law, public law, comparative law, and international law. It accessibly explains the law to epidemiologists and public health policymakers, and public health to jurists and legal practitioners. This book lucidly urges professionals of public health and law to reflect on how the myriad legal instruments and legal institutions should best be used to promote and protect public health in ways that are at once ethical and lawful. It is a must read for anyone who is interested in gaining insights into public health law and regulation in this highly internationalised Chinese Special Administrative Region.

This is the first book that focuses on the entrenched, fundamental divergence between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal and Macau's Tribunal de Última Instância over their constitutional jurisprudence, with the former repeatedly invalidating unconstitutional legislation with finality and the latter having never challenged the constitutionality of legislation at all. This divergence is all the more remarkable when considered in the light of the fact that the two Regions, commonly subject to oversight by China's authoritarian Party-state, possess constitutional frameworks that are nearly identical; feature similar hybrid regimes; and share a lot in history, ethnicity, culture, and language. Informed by political science and economics, this book breaks new ground by locating the cause of this anomaly, studied within the universe of authoritarian constitutionalism, not in the common law-civil law differences between these two former European dependencies, but the disparate levels of political transaction costs therein.

This is the first book that focuses on the entrenched, fundamental divergence between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal and Macau's Tribunal de Última Instância over their constitutional jurisprudence, with the former repeatedly invalidating unconstitutional legislation with finality and the latter having never challenged the constitutionality of legislation at all. This divergence is all the more remarkable when considered in the light of the fact that the two Regions, commonly subject to oversight by China's authoritarian Party-state, possess constitutional frameworks that are nearly identical; feature similar hybrid regimes; and share a lot in history, ethnicity, culture, and language. Informed by political science and economics, this book breaks new ground by locating the cause of this anomaly, studied within the universe of authoritarian constitutionalism, not in the common law-civil law differences between these two former European dependencies, but the disparate levels of political transaction costs therein.

Drawing insights from economics and political science, Judging Regulators explains why the administrative law of the US and the UK has radically diverged from each other on questions of law, fact, and discretion. This book proposes an original interdisciplinary theory that integrates the concept of veto-gates into a strategic model of judicial review of administrative action. It argues that long-term changes in the number of effective veto-gates in the US and the UK are the key to understanding the antithesis that emerged between their administrative jurisprudence. It then forecasts the future of Anglo-American administrative law in light of recent destabilizing political developments, such as attempts by the US Congress to abolish Chevron deference and the UK Supreme Court's interventionist decision in R (on the application of Miller) v. The Prime Minister. A crucial overview of the history and future of administrative law, this book is critical reading for scholars and students of public law and comparative law, particularly those focusing on comparative administrative law in common law contexts. Its theoretical insights will also be useful for political scientists and economists interested in judicial politics and regulation.