Scholars have generally assumed that authoritarianism and rule of law are mutually incompatible. Convinced that free markets and rule of law must tip authoritarian societies in a liberal direction, nearly all studies of law and contemporary politics have neglected that improbable coupling: authoritarian rule of law. Through a focus on Singapore, this book presents an analysis of authoritarian legalism. It shows how prosperity, public discourse, and a rigorous observance of legal procedure have enabled a reconfigured rule of law such that liberal form encases illiberal content. Institutions and process at the bedrock of rule of law and liberal democracy become tools to constrain dissent while augmenting discretionary political power – even as the national and international legitimacy of the state is secured. This book offers a valuable and original contribution to understanding the complexities of law, language and legitimacy in our time.
• The first study of how political liberalism can be systematically dismantled such that a nation might be lauded the world over as rule of law even as basic legal freedoms are eroded • The first close and sustained analysis - spanning 50 years - of the political processes • The first application of discourse analysis to penetrate deeply into the ideological techniques and effects of authoritarian assaults on liberal institutions of rule of law
Contents
1. Law, illiberalism, and the Singapore case; 2. Law as discourse: theoretical and definitional parameters; 3. Punishing bodies, securing the nation: 1966 Vandalism Act; 4. Policing the press: the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act; 5. Policing lawyers and constraining citizenship: Legal Profession (Am't) Act 1986; 6. Policing religion: Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act; 7. Entrenching illiberalism: the 2009 Public Order Act; 8. Legislation, illiberalism and legitimacy.
Printer friendly version