ABSTRACT
In the 40 years of Singapore’s Independence, none of the many amendments to the Constitution have altered Part IV, the Fundamental Liberties chapter. Part IV appears insulated from the developments taking place in other jurisdictions in two primary respects. First, in an age of rights,1
the Singapore constitutional experiment has remained aloof of the trend towards constitutionally incorporating extensive lists not only of civilpolitical rights, but also socio-economic rights and third-generation solidarity rights.2 The 2002 Timor Leste Constitution, for example, includes unique rights relating to consumers and the third-generation right to a healthy environment, as well as other socio-economic rights and duties.3
Second, in relation to constitutional interpretation, Singapore courts have struck a discordant note against the chorus of voices which seek to construe rights expansively, in an age of ‘transnational judicial conversations’4 where the interlocutors are judges committed to a certain brand of western liberal values. This particularist bent is evident in judicial decisions espousing a ‘local conditions’ approach to adjudicating rights. The termination of appeals to the Privy Council in 1994 was driven by the view that foreign judges and foreign cases cannot or do not sufficiently take cognisance of domestic particularities.
