Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 1 Przegląd Sejmowy

Authors help

  1. 1 Rulka M.

Years help

  1. 1 2020

Results found: 1

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Republic of Singapore
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Republika Singapuru: wyrok Sądu Apelacyjnego z 30 czerwca 2020 r. w sprawie Daniel De Costa Augustin vs. Attorney-General (dotyczący realizacji prawa do głosowania w wyborach parlamentarnych zarządzonych w czasie pandemii koronawirusa), sygn. [2020] SGCA 60

100%
Rulka M.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2020
|
issue 6(161)
223-231
EN
The Parliament of Singapore of the 13th parliamentary term was dissolved on 23 June 2020. Despite the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic, this meant, in accordance with Article 66 of the 1965 Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, that the parliamentary elections had to be held. However, the legislator has established special rules for the election procedure in connection with the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. A special statutory regulation was adopted on 4 May 2020. Among other things, solutions have been introduced to give people isolated due to the coronavirus the opportunity to vote by organizing elections in places of mass isolation, such as hotels or student dormitories. The solutions provided for in this regulation have been the subject of a court complaint filed by Daniel De Costa Augustin, a Singapore citizen. In the complaint it was argued that the precautionary measures needed to protect public health at the present time have the effect of depriving voters of the right to free and fair elections. In the judgement, the Court of Appeal found that the applicant had failed to show that the adopted solutions violated the right to vote. In particular, it pointed out that health issues are not related to the right to vote and should be dealt with separately as a public health issue, which was not the subject of any action brought before the Court of Appeal.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.