Constitution of the Republic of Singapore | |
---|---|
Old Parliament House, photographed in January 2006
|
|
Citation | 1985 Rev. Ed., 1999 Rep. |
Enacted by | Parliament of Singapore |
Date enacted | 22 December 1965 |
Date assented to | 23 December 1965 |
Date commenced | 9 August 1965 |
Legislative history | |
Bill | Republic of Singapore Independence Bill |
Bill citation | Bill No. B 43 of 1965 |
Introduced by | Lee Kuan Yew |
First reading | 13 December 1965 |
Second reading | 22 December 1965 |
Third reading | 22 December 1965 |
Related legislation | |
Republic of Singapore Independence Act 1965 (No. 9 of 1965, 1985 Rev. Ed.) (dates above relate to this Act) |
|
Status: In force |
The Constitution of the Republic of Singapore is the supreme law of Singapore. A written constitution, the text which took effect on 9 August 1965 is derived from the Constitution of the State of Singapore 1963, provisions of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia made applicable to Singapore by the Republic of Singapore Independence Act 1965 (No. 9 of 1965, 1985 Rev. Ed.), and the Republic of Singapore Independence Act itself. The text of the Constitution is one of the legally binding sources of constitutional law in Singapore, the others being judicial interpretations of the Constitution, and certain other statutes. Non-binding sources are influences on constitutional law such as soft law, constitutional conventions, and public international law.
In the exercise of its original jurisdiction – that is, its power to hear cases for the first time – the High Court carries out two types of judicial review: judicial review of legislation, and judicial review of administrative acts. Although in a 1980 case the Privy Council held that the fundamental liberties in Part IV of the Constitution should be interpreted generously, Singapore courts usually adopt a philosophy of deference to Parliament and a strong presumption of constitutional validity, which has led to fundamental liberties being construed narrowly in certain cases. The courts also generally adopt a purposive approach, favouring interpretations that promote the purpose or object underlying constitutional provisions.