Indefinite detention: rule by law or rule of law?

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511552021.006

5 - Indefinite detention: rule by law or rule of law?

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 August 2009

R. Rueban Balasubramaniam

Edited by

Victor V. Ramraj

Show author details

Victor V. Ramraj: Affiliation:
National University of Singapore

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

Global terrorism is thought to herald a paradigm shift within constitutional liberal democracies where liberty must give way to security creating a new normality. Such a situation differs from a classically conceived state of emergency because it does not precipitate a temporary suspension of the rule of law. In response, post-9/11, constitutional liberal democracies, like the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada, therefore, contemplate the use of indefinite detention without trial (indefinite detention) as a counter-terrorism measure that should possess rule-of-law legitimacy.

Indefinite detention raises problems for morality and the rule of law. It is morally troubling though it is far from clear that indefinite detention is inherently immoral and intolerable. From the perspective of the rule of law or legality, a question arises whether law can meaningfully regulate indefinite detention. If such control is impossible, then constitutional liberal democracies run the risk of creating rule by law not the rule of law. The rule of law contrasts with arbitrary power while, rule by law, on the other hand, involves the use of the legal form to cloak arbitrary power.

In this chapter, I explore the lessons that constitutional liberal democracies can learn from Malaysia and Singapore where indefinite detention has been a long-standing feature of the legal landscape under internal security legislation. This power has been used as a tool of abuse and is now justified in the name of counter-terrorism.

Type: Chapter
Information: Emergencies and the Limits of Legality , pp. 118 - 142

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511552021.006 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Stewart, H., ‘Is Indefinite Detention of Terrorist Suspects Really Constitutional’ (2005) 54 University of New Brunswick Law Journal235Google Scholar

Tamanaha, B.Z., On the Rule of Law: History, Politics, Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 92–3.CrossRef Google Scholar

Fuller, L.L., The Morality of Law, 2nd edn (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969)Google Scholar

Tan, K.Y.L. and Lam, P.E. (eds.), Managing Political Change in Singapore: The Elected Presidency (London and New York: Routledge, 1997)

Lijphart, A., Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977)Google Scholar

Jacobsen, M. and Bruun, O. (eds.), Human Rights and Asian Values: Contesting National Identities and Cultural Representations in Asia (Surrey: Curzon Press, 2000)CrossRef

Case, W., Politics in Southeast Asia: Democracy or Less (London: Routledge Curzon, 2002).Google Scholar

Harper, T.N., The End of Empire and the Making of Malaya (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999)CrossRef Google Scholar

Hor, M., ‘Terrorism and the Criminal Law: Singapore's Solution’ (2002) Singapore Journal of Legal Studies30Google Scholar

Allan, T.R.S., ‘Procedural Fairness and the Duty of Respect’ (1998) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies497CrossRef Google Scholar

Balasubramaniam, R.R., ‘The Karam Singh Case’ in Harding, A.J. and Lee, H.P. (eds.), Constitutional Landmarks in Malaysian Law: 50 Years of the Malaysian Constitution (Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Law Journal, 2007)Google Scholar

Fritz, N. and Flaherty, M., Unjust Order: Malaysia's Internal Security Act (New York: Joseph R. Crowley Program in International Human Rights, Fordham Law School, 2003), pp. 40–1.Google Scholar

Milne, R.S. and Mauzy, D.K., Malaysian Politics under Mahathir (London: Routledge, 1999).Google Scholar

Lee, H.P., Constitutional Conflicts in Contemporary Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur and New York: Oxford University Press, 1995)Google Scholar

Yatim, R., Freedom Under Executive Power in Malaysia: A Study of Executive Supremacy (Kuala Lumpur: Endowment Publications, 1995).Google Scholar

Harding, A.J., Law, Government and the Constitution in Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur: Malayan Law Journal, 1996), pp. 133–6.Google Scholar

Frank, B.et al., The Decline in the Rule of Law in Singapore and Malaysia: A Report of the International Committee on Human Rights of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York (New York: Association of the Bar of the City of New York, 1990), p. 55.Google Scholar

Hor, M., ‘Law and terror: Singapore Stories and Malaysian Dilemmas’ in Ramraj, V.V., Hor, M. and Roach, K. (eds.), Global Anti-Terrorism Law and Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 281–2.Google Scholar

Lee, T., ‘Malaysia and the Internal Security Act: The Insecurity of Human Rights after September 11’ (2002) Singapore Journal of Legal Studies56.Google Scholar

Craig, P., ‘Formal and Substantive Conceptions of the Rule of Law: An Analytical Framework’ (1997) Public Law467.Google Scholar

Hart, H.L.A., The Concept of Law, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994)Google Scholar

Green, L., ‘The Concept of Law Revisited’ (1996) Michigan Law Review1687CrossRef Google Scholar

Waldron, J., ‘All We Like Sheep’ (1999) Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence169.CrossRef Google Scholar

Raz, J., ‘The Rule of Law and its Virtue’ in Raz, J., The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979).CrossRef Google Scholar

Finnis, J., Natural Law and Natural Rights (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980), p. 273.Google Scholar

Winston, K. (ed.), The Principles of Social Order: Selected Essays on Lon L. Fuller (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001), pp. 36–7.

Fuller, L.L., ‘American Legal Philosophy at Mid-Century’ (1954) 6 Journal of Legal Education467.Google Scholar

Dyzenhaus, D., The Constitution of Law: Legality in a Time of Emergency (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), p. 231.CrossRef Google Scholar

Alexy, R., The Argument for Injustice: A Reply to Legal Positivism, Paulson, B.L. and Paulson, S.L. (trans.) (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002), pp. 31–5.Google Scholar

Fuller, L.L., ‘A Reply to Professors Cohen and Dworkin’ (1965) 10 Villanova Law Review655 at 657.Google Scholar

Ramraj, V.V., ‘Four Models of Due Process’ (2004) 2 International Journal of Constitutional Law492CrossRef Google Scholar

Jayasuriya, K., ‘The Exception Becomes the Norm: Law and Regimes of Exception in East Asia’ (2001) 2 Asian Pacific Law and Policy Journal 108 at 114–17.Google Scholar

Steyn, J., ‘Guantanamo Bay: The Legal Black Hole’ (2004) 53 International Comparative Law Quarterly1.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cole, D., ‘The Priority of Morality: The Emergency Constitution's Blind Spot’ (2004) 113 Yale Law Journal1753.CrossRef Google Scholar

Fiss, O., ‘The War Against Terrorism and the Rule of Law’ (2006) 26 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies235.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dworkin, R., Law's Empire (Harvard: Harvard University Press, 1986)Google Scholar

Gross, O. and Aoláin, F. Ní, Law in Times of Crisis: Emergency Powers in Theory and Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006).CrossRef Google Scholar

Waldron, J., ‘Security and Liberty: The Image of Balance’ (2003) 102 The Journal of Political Philosophy191.CrossRef Google Scholar