Publication:

Beyond Lex Specialis: Rethinking Constitutional Conflicts in Sham Tsz Kit v Secretary for Justice

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2026-03-16

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Brill
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Abstract

On September 5, 2023, Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal ruled in Sham Tsz Kit v Secretary for Justice that the legislature must create an alternative legal framework within two years to allow same-sex couples to manage their civil affairs. However, the court declined to recognise same-sex marriage, unanimously holding that the gendered marriage provisions in the constitutional documents, as a lex specialis, override broader guarantees of privacy and equality. While lex specialis is traditionally used to resolve normative conflicts, its application in human rights contexts remains contested. This article argues that the court’s reliance on lex specialis is theoretically flawed and inconsistent with international human rights jurisprudence. Instead, a proportionality test should be adopted to adjudicate conflicts between constitutional rights. Through a close reading of Sham, this article contributes to broader debates on constitutional interpretation and LGBTQ+ rights in Hong Kong.

Description

Other Available Sources

Research Data

Keywords

Lex Specialis, LGBTQ, Constitutional Law, Human Rights, Hong Kong, Marriage Equality

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access License Articles (IOAL), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories