The special symposium sections of this and the September 2020 issues of the Singapore Journal of Legal Studies bring together a collection of papers that look at contemporary issues relating to public law in Singapore. In addition to looking at issues of theory and doctrine, the symposium will consider issues relating to public law litigation. Public law litigation remains an under-explored area in public law scholarship and one that is ripe for discussion. Not only has there been an increase in the number of applications for judicial review, there has also been an increasing diversity in the issues mooted in courts in recent years. For example, in the recent past, the courts have had to consider a challenge by a member of a particular geographical constituency of the constitutionality of the executive's decision not to call a by-election on the vacation of a parliamentary seat for that constituency; a challenge by a homosexual couple of the constitutionality of a provision of the Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed Sing) restricting homosexual conduct in the absence of any criminal proceedings under the provision against them (with more challenges pertaining to section 377A of the Penal Code currently on the docket); a challenge by a member of an opposition political party of the constitutional vires of a loan made by the executive to an international funding body; a challenge by members of the Hindu religion of a ban on the use of musical instruments during an annual religious procession; a challenge by a Sikh prisoners' counsellor of a policy on hair for prisoners that affected members of a particular religion; a challenge by a potential electoral candidate on the absence of a by-election on the vacation of a seat in a group representation constituency; and challenges to the validity of constitutional amendments relating to the elected presidency.

The mandatory death penalty for murder was changed in Singapore in 2012 to give judges the discretion to choose between imposing the death penalty or life imprisonment (with caning) in cases of non-intentional murder. This article reviews the sentences for murder since then and the factors considered by the courts to justify the use of the death penalty or not. The move from an inherently arbitrary mandatory regime to a discretionary one was a watershed moment in Singapore, and it is questioned if the time has come for the death penalty for murder to be abolished completely.

The Elected Presidency was first conceived as an institutional check on the “untrammelled powers” of the Prime Minister and Cabinet as the parliamentary executive, in two main areas—the safeguarding of Singapore’s “past reserves” and the integrity of its public service. As one of the most heavily amended institutions, it is still being “re-made”. Given the substantial amendments made to the President’s safeguarding roles, this article focuses on one particular aspect, his fiscal powers. It provides an overview of the original fiscal structure, by re-visiting the early rationale for the Elected Presidency, and the original fiscal actors and fiscal powers. It then details and analyses the ensuing constitutional amendments which have altered the fiscal mechanism, thereby substantively reducing the President’s fiscal powers. Finally, it makes several concluding observations on the further re-making of the Elected Presidency.

This article analyses the current state of the law and policy in Singapore on surrogacy, assisted reproduction technology (“ART”), and adoption in light of the ministerial statements after UKM v Attorney-General. Of particular and pressing concern is situations where overseas surrogacy and ART leave a child fatherless or motherless for life. Analysing this in light of various factors, including the fragmentation or elimination of the various aspects of parenthood, the principle of putting the child’s welfare and best interests as the first and paramount consideration (including a child’s right to both a father and mother), public policy and social science, it will be argued that this form of surrogacy and ART should be urgently prohibited.Abrief survey of how other countries have approached such issues will be conducted. Various recommendations for law reform will also be proposed.

This article examines the possessory lien as an interest in admiralty, with particular reference to the position of ship repairers as well as port and harbour authorities.

In Nagaenthran, the Court of Appeal reasoned in obiter that legislation ousting judicial review on grounds of illegality, irrationality, or procedural impropriety will ordinarily be unconstitutional. The precise logic employed here is unclear. Four interpretations have been offered, but they either do not reflect the court’s actual remarks, or complicate other aspects of administrative law doctrine. This article offers a fifth interpretation, which largely avoids these difficulties. Ouster clauses are ordinarily unconstitutional because they usually extend power-conferring provisions beyond the purposes Parliament intended them to serve.