ABSTRACT
This chapter looks at problems with the courts’ use of suspension orders in Hong Kong. It considers key problems in the way that the courts have balanced the state’s interests in suspending a declaration against the normative importance of upholding a finding of unconstitutionality. The chapter describes the assumptions made by the courts on the need for suspension orders and why these assumptions do not hold true in the context of Hong Kong. A survey of the cases indicates that the courts in Hong Kong have been willing to issue suspension orders for much less, and this is done in the absence of a real empirical engagement with the government’s claims about the need for a suspension order. Judicial discussions surrounding suspension orders appear to be premised on a level of faith in the ability of the political branches to enact constitutionally compliant legislation.
