Introduction: Judging the Singapore Constitution

Abstract

In Singapore, constitutional interpretation has similarly revolved around this orbit of theories and modalities. It may be said that there is evidence for textualism, originalism and purposivism being used in the courts, although not much living constitutionalism. However, a critical examination of how judges interpret the constitution, specifically what sources, methods, and theories they consider authoritative, had for a long time been limited by the paucity of constitutional cases. However, there has been a significant increase in the number of cases in the last ten years. Between 2006 and 2015, in my estimation, there were about fifty reported cases where constitutional issues were raised. This is an average of about five cases per year. In 2015 alone, between January and October, about fourteen cases decided by the courts raised constitutional matters. During this time, constitutional issues raised included whether the right to life and personal liberty included the right not to be tortured (Article 9(1) of the Singapore Constitution), the scope of religious freedom, freedom of speech, as well as judicial independence. The chapters in this volume address these changes, focusing on constitutional interpretation, from a variety of perspectives and approaches.