ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the Singapore courts' evolving approach to and treatment of foreign law in the constitutional realm. It begins by laying the background to the four walls doctrine, situating it within the contextual setting of Singapore's legal landscape in the 1990s. It considers the reception and application of the four walls doctrine in Singapore. The chapter then considers how the Singapore judiciary has engaged foreign constitutional jurisprudence by examining: the weight accorded to foreign decisions; the selection of comparators and the relevance of difference in determining the use of foreign jurisprudence; and, the purpose of the foreign jurisprudence. The chapter argues that the four walls doctrine has never really gained traction in Singapore. It also argues that the doctrine reinforces the need for the courts to be sensitive to the local context. Foreign jurisprudence must be carefully considered for its relevance and utility to the local context, and whether it falls within the ambit of the constitutional provisions.
