Reception and Resistance: Globalisation, International Law and the Singapore Constitution

接受與抗拒：全球化、國際法與新加坡憲法

在國際法規範日益滲透國內法規秩序的情形下，造成了「憲法國際化」的現象。這預設了在市場整合、人權保障等諸多領域中，從國內到國際有不同層次的管制方式，以及在這些領域中國際法與憲法的逐漸整合。國際法會影響憲法的圖像，立法及制度將會被國際標準所形塑，法院判決將會被條約、習慣法甚至無法律拘束力的規範所衝擊。
本文經由檢視新加坡在人權法及憲法判決的實踐，以及做為一個調節各國法律的共同基準來源的國際法，如何影響國內憲法。尤其當我們特別注意到在商法領域中，最佳國際實踐多半會得到好的效果，在公法領域卻因為法律文化影響本土憲法秩序的形成而遭遇到更多的困難。舉例來說，當新加坡法院遇到外國案件時，他們將會避免做出權利擴張的解釋，以保護其社群價值。當條約必須要被轉化以具備國內法效力時，新加坡法院肯認若該規範已經具備國際習慣法地位時，則可直接適用在國內法中，雖然國內法的法位階仍優先於該規範。

The increasing permeability of the domestic legal order to international regulatory regimes has given rise to what some call the “internationalisation of constitutional law.” This presupposes that there are different layers of governance ranging from the local and global levels in such fields as market integration and human rights protection and a gradual convergence between international and constitutional law in this respect. International law may influence the constitutional landscape where legislation or institutions are modelled after international standards, and where rights adjudication is impacted by treaty, customary international law or even soft law. This paper examines Singapore practice, with a focus on human rights law and constitutional adjudication, and how international law, which as a source of collective standards may harmonise the laws of nations, has influenced domestic constitutional law. In particular, it notes that while international best practices may receive a warm reception in the field of commercial law, more resistance has been encountered in relation to public law, where legal culture influences the shaping of an autochthonous constitutional order. For example, while Singapore courts do engage with foreign decisions, they have rejected rights-expansive cases contrary to their protection of communitarian values. While treaties must be incorporated to have municipal legal effect, the Singapore courts have affirmed that if the customary international legal status of a norm is established, it automatically applies in the domestic context, although the predominant view is that municipal law enjoys legal priority.