This book examines administrative law throughout Asia, exploring the profound changes in many legal regimes that have occurred. It shows how many states have shifted towards a more market-oriented regulatory state model, involving a greater role for judges and law-like processes, and explores the profound implications of this for policy-making.

This book examines administrative law in Asia, exploring the profound changes in the legal regimes of many Asian states that have taken place in recent years. Political democratization in some countries, economic change more broadly and the forces of globalization have put pressure on the developmental state model, wherein bureaucrats governed in a kind of managed capitalism and public-private partnerships were central. In their stead, a more market-oriented regulatory state model seems to be emerging in many jurisdictions, with emphases on transparency, publicity, and constrained discretion. This book analyses the causes and consequences of this shift from a socio-legal perspective, showing clearly how decisions about the scope of administrative law and judicial review have an important effect on the shape and style of government regulation. Taking a comparative approach, individual chapters trace the key developments in the legal regimes of major states across Asia, including China, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Singapore, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. They demonstrate that, in many cases, Asian states have shifted away from traditional systems in which judges were limited in terms of their influence over social and economic policy, towards regulatory models of the state involving a greater role for judges and law-like processes. The book also considers whether judiciaries are capable of performing the tasks they are being given, and assesses the profound consequences the judicialization of governance is starting to have on state policy-making in Asia.

This book illuminates how law and politics interact in the judicial doctrines and explores how democracy sustains and is sustained by the exercise of judicial power.

Shah uncovers the complex interaction between constitutional law, religion and politics in three key plural societies in Asia.

Ronald Dworkin once imagined law as an empire and judges as its princes. But over time, the arc of law has bent steadily toward deference to the administrative state. Adrian Vermeule argues that law has freely abandoned its imperial pretensions, and has done so for internal legal reasons. In area after area, judges and lawyers, working out the logical implications of legal principles, have come to believe that administrators should be granted broad leeway to set policy, determine facts, interpret ambiguous statutes, and even define the boundaries of their own jurisdiction. Agencies have greater democratic legitimacy and technical competence to confront many issues than lawyers and judges do. And as the questions confronting the state involving climate change, terrorism, and biotechnology (to name a few) have become ever more complex, legal logic increasingly indicates that abnegation is the wisest course of action. As Law’s Abnegation makes clear, the state did not shove law out of the way. The judiciary voluntarily relegated itself to the margins of power. The last and greatest triumph of legalism was to depose itself.

Multilateral and bilateral aid agencies now direct much of their East Asia activities to so-called ''governance'' reform. Almost every major development project in the region must now be justified in these terms and will usually involve an element of legal institutional reform, anti-corruption initiatives or strengthening of civil society - and often a mix of all of these. Most are, in fact, major exercises in social engineering. Aid agencies and major multilateral players like the IMF, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, are attempting not just to improve governance systems and combat corruption but, implicitly, to restructure entire national political systems and administrative structures. ''Conditionality'' puts real weight behind these projects. If successful, they could transform the face of East Asia. Defining ''governance'' and understanding ''corruption'' are therefore not minor issues of terminology. However, a great deal of optimism is required to believe that social engineering for good governance will succeed in either Indonesia or Vietnam within the foreseeable future. In Indonesia, there is neither the political will nor the mechanism to act, since the legal system is itself utterly corrupted. Better laws have been passed, but they fail in implementation. In Vietnam the problems are somewhat different, but the outcomes are similar. Corruption is widely recognised to be a major political, social and economic issue - even by the Party itself - but few cases are ever tried. The bureaucracy (including the legal system) and the party are so complicit that reform is impossible. These systemic problems point to the basic flaw in the good governance agenda and strategy. A politically powerful alliance of foreign and domestic interests is necessary. Foreign multilateral agencies, donors and NGOs are able to set the international policy agenda, but their domestic allies are politically weak. In the absence of rule of law, the basic institutions of these transitional societies remain largely as they were and there is, as yet, no viable alternative system in either Indonesia or Vietnam. The argument of this book is that more might be achieved sooner by much better understanding of political, legal, commercial and social dynamics in Indonesia and Vietnam, not as they are meant to be but as they are. Multilateral agencies, donors, NGOs, business firms and scholars on the one hand; and local politicians, bureaucrats, business people, lawyers, journalists, academics, and NGOs on the other hand have much usefully to discuss. Only out of that dialogue, a dialogue between the world as it is and the world of ideals, can steady progress be made. This book examines these problems initially in an abstract theoretical sense before testing the frameworks thus established through a series of case studies of Indonesia and Vietnam, two very different Asian states: one (Vietnam) still socialist but in difficult transition from command economy to a limited market structure; the other (Indonesia) embracing a market economy and an emerging democratic system; one with a Confucian legal and political tradition, the other not; one with a socialist, the other a civil law, legal system. The book is divided into three parts. The first, ''Frameworks'', establishes some theoretical approaches to the problem of corruption and governance (including a East European example). The second part looks at case studies from Indonesia; and the third part looks specifically at Vietnam. Relevant legislation and judicial decisions can be found in the table of cases and a detailed glossary and list of abbreviations will assist readers unfamiliar with the countries under examination.ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORSIbrahim Assegaf is the Executive Director of the Centre for Indonesian Law and Policy Studies (Pusat Studi Hukum dam Kebijakan Indonesia) and the Managing Director of the Indonesian law website, http://www.hukumonline.com. He is also a member of the Steering Committee for the Establishment of the Anti-Corruption Commission and for the UNDP''s Partnership for Governance Reform. Paul Brietzke is a Professor at Valparaiso University Law School (USA) and from January 1999 to August 2000 was Legal Advisor at the then Ministry of Justice of Indonesia in Jakarta. Howard Dick is an Associate Professor in the Australian Centre for International Business, University of Melbourne, Australia. John Gillespie is Associate Professor in the Law School, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia. Gary Goodpaster is Professor of Law Emeritus, University of California School of Law, Davis; and former Chief of Party, Partnership for Economic Growth, a joint economic policy development project of USAID and the Government of Indonesia. Leslie Holmes is a Professor of Political Science and Director of the Contemporary Europe Research Centre at the University of Melbourne, Australia. He is also the President of the International Council for Central and East European Studies. Kanishka Jayasuriya is Senior Research Fellow, South East Asia Research Centre, City University of Hong Kong Tim Lindsey is Director of the Asian Law Centre and an Associate Professor in the Law School, both at the University of Melbourne, Australia. Elizabeth Maitland is Associate Director of the Australian Centre for International Business, University of Melbourne. Pip Nicholson is Associate Director (Vietnam) of the Asian Law Centre and a Senior Fellow of the Law School, both at the University of Melbourne, Australia. Veronica Taylor is Professor of Law and Director of the Asian Law Center, University of Washington, Seattle.

Provides a comparative overview of corporate governance frameworks and practices in major Asian countries.

This is a compendium of administrative law and judicial review in Papua New Guinea. In this book the author precisely recounts the history of the development of administrative law and judicial review in England and some other common law jurisdictions. The main theme of the book is, however, devoted to judicial review in Papua New Guinea. The practice and procedure for appealing from the decision of the National Court in judicial review are unique and onerous. This book evaluates them in detail to give the readers a complete sense of reference. The interlocutory procedures encapsulated in this book are also relevant for any proceeding before the courts. At the end of various chapters, the author makes some insightful and thought-provoking commentaries on gaps found in judicial review. The book is an authoritative text for lawyers, law students, academia, judicial officers and other interested persons alike. It is a must read for lawyers and law students who seek to be familiar with the often cumbersome judicial review procedures and practices. For students and scholars in other disciplines who aim to learn and abreast themselves of how administrative law affects administrative action and public policy, this book is a perfect choice. The book dissects complex administrative law concepts and enables lay persons, including those in the public service, to fully understand and apply them. The book is a valuable resource material for the Pacific Island countries like Fiji, Vanuatu and Solomon Islands, who have adopted the common law legal systems similar to Papua New Guinea. BOOK REVIEWS “The author collates, culls and compiles one important material for use by judicial officers and practitioners in the area of judicial review.” – Leslie Mamu, LL.B, Acting Public Solicitor, Papua New Guinea, 18 February 2018, Port Moresby, PNG “This welcome new book by Christopher Karaiye is essential reading for all lawyers practising in the busy area of Judicial Review in PNG and also students of the topic. It is a well-researched and presented work and will be a worthy addition to my administrative law library.” – Terry Lambert, LL.B, LL.M, Barrister (Queensland, Australia), Lawyer (PNG), Solicitor (England & Wales), 7 June 2018, Brisbane, Australia “The book “Administrative Law and Judicial Review in Papua New Guinea” is a must read for lawyers and public alike involved in the judicial review of administrative decisions. The book contains a comprehensive guide to an increasingly important yet quite complex area of law. The author draws from his own experience and research to make this important contribution to the development of Papua New Guinea’s expanding judicial review jurisprudence. This work is essential reading to understand the nuances involved in this area of law.” – Dr Vergil Narokobi, LL.B, LL.M, Ph.D, Counsel for the Papua New Guinea Ombudsman Commission & President of Papua New Guinea Law Society, 25 June 2018, Port Moresby, PNG “This work is of very high quality and would be a very valuable tool for judges, magistrates, lawyers, the academia, and people in decision-making positions in the public and the private sectors. I recommend the book to them. I am impressed with your comprehensive use of local case precedents and in-depth knowledge of the topics.” – Honourable Sir Gibbs Salika, KBE CSM OBE, Deputy Chief Justice of Papua New Guinea (as he then was), 4 July 2018, Port Moresby, PNG “An extensive, thought-provoking and easy to read compendium that makes accessible the law of Papua New Guinea on the topic of judicial review in its many guises.” – Emeritus Professor Tony Angelo (Victoria University of Wellington), QC, 7 October 2018, Wellington, New Zealand

This volume explores the various strategies, mechanisms and processes that influence rule of law dynamics across borders and the national/international divide, illuminating the diverse paths of influence. It shows to what extent, and how, rule of law dynamics have changed in recent years, especially at the transnational and international levels of government. To explore these interactive dynamics, the volume adopts an interdisciplinary approach, bringing together the normative perspective of law with the analytical perspective of social sciences. The volume contributes to several fields, including studies of rule of law, law and development, and good governance; democratization; globalization studies; neo-institutionalism and judicial studies; international law, transnational governance and the emerging literature on judicial reforms in authoritarian regimes; and comparative law (Islamic, African, Asian, Latin American legal systems).

Winner of the Scribes Book Award “As brilliantly imaginative as it is urgently timely.” —Richard H. Fallon, Jr., Harvard Law School “At no time more than the present, a defense of expertise-based governance and administration is sorely needed, and this book provides it with gusto.” —Frederick Schauer, author of The Proof A highly original framework for restoring confidence in a government bureaucracy increasingly derided as “the deep state.” Is the modern administrative state illegitimate? Unconstitutional? Unaccountable? Dangerous? America has long been divided over these questions, but the debate has recently taken on more urgency and spilled into the streets. Cass Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule argue that the administrative state can be redeemed so long as public officials are constrained by morality and guided by stable rules. Officials should make clear rules, ensure transparency, and never abuse retroactivity, so that current guidelines are not under constant threat of change. They should make rules that are understandable and avoid issuing contradictory ones. These principles may seem simple, but they have a great deal of power. Already, they limit the activities of administrative agencies every day. In more robust form, they could address some of the concerns of critics who decry the “deep state” and yearn for its downfall. “Has something to offer both critics and supporters...a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate over the constitutionality of the modern state.” —Review of Politics “The authors freely admit that the administrative state is not perfect. But, they contend, it is far better than its critics allow.” —Wall Street Journal