The Democracy Dichotomy: Framing the Hong Kong 2019 Street Protests as Legitimacy Counterclaims against an Incoherent Constitutional Morality
In: Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the LawSearch for other papers by James Greenwood-Reeves in
Current site
Google Scholar
This article evaluates the 2019 street protests in Hong Kong following the proposal of the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019, in light of the constitutional settlement of the region. Firstly, it examines the ‘constitutional morality’ of Hong Kong, that is, the moral principles underlying its foundational claims to moral authority. Secondly it analyses whether the Administration’s ‘legitimacy claims’ – its rational-normative arguments for obedience to law – follow from these constitutional moral principles. Concluding that the legitimacy claims of the Administration pursuant to the Bill proved morally unintelligible, this research finds that protest action by citizens was a logical and rational response to a perceived legitimacy claim failure. It suggests that similar protests are likely to occur for the foreseeable future given the instability of the region’s constitutional morality.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1269 | 145 | 18 |
| Full Text Views | 273 | 14 | 3 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 422 | 17 | 7 |
The Democracy Dichotomy: Framing the Hong Kong 2019 Street Protests as Legitimacy Counterclaims against an Incoherent Constitutional Morality
In: Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the LawSearch for other papers by James Greenwood-Reeves in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
This article evaluates the 2019 street protests in Hong Kong following the proposal of the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill 2019, in light of the constitutional settlement of the region. Firstly, it examines the ‘constitutional morality’ of Hong Kong, that is, the moral principles underlying its foundational claims to moral authority. Secondly it analyses whether the Administration’s ‘legitimacy claims’ – its rational-normative arguments for obedience to law – follow from these constitutional moral principles. Concluding that the legitimacy claims of the Administration pursuant to the Bill proved morally unintelligible, this research finds that protest action by citizens was a logical and rational response to a perceived legitimacy claim failure. It suggests that similar protests are likely to occur for the foreseeable future given the instability of the region’s constitutional morality.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1269 | 145 | 18 |
| Full Text Views | 273 | 14 | 3 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 422 | 17 | 7 |
