Abstract as per original application
(English/Chinese): |
The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (CFA) decided the Sham Tsz Kit v Secretary for Justice case in 2023. This landmark decision requires the government to introduce statutory recognition of same-sex couples within two years. The CFA however granted the government ample discretion concerning the form and substance of such recognition. ‘Core’ rights, the CFA ruled, should be granted to same-sex unions, whereas ‘supplementary’ rights may be reserved for married heterosexual couples. However, this core/supplementary distinction was left undefined. The CFA gave no clear guidance on the essential rights and obligations that same-sex couples must enjoy. This vagueness affects legal certainty and may generate discrimination against an already vulnerable minority.
This project aims to define the essential rights and obligations that should be covered by a legal scheme recognising same-sex partnerships in Hong Kong. To do so, it will examine the constitutional and human rights framework that determines the legal position of same-sex couples in Hong Kong constitutional law, as well as the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, where similar questions have been discussed. It will also analyse pertinent international human rights law. The project will (1) investigate the meaning, shortcomings, and potential of the distinction between core and supplementary rights and obligations; (2) assess the transformation of legal notions of ‘family’, and the significance thereof, offering an intersectional and multidisciplinary critique of such transformation; and (3) examine the evolutions in equality law concerning same-sex couples. Indeed, and crucially, the CFA appears to have questioned the possibility of restricting the rights of same-sex couples to protect the traditional family, thereby possibly undermining the argument that has typically justified their differential treatment.
The project will fill a significant knowledge gap and contribute to the global debate. It will define the essential guarantees that must be granted to same-sex couples when equal marriage is not constitutionally required. This problem is common to many jurisdictions and, to date, remains unresolved. The project will do so via a multidisciplinary and intersectional approach that draws on queer theory, sociology, and anthropology. This approach has not yet been used with reference to Hong Kong law. The project findings will also offer practical guidance to courts, advocates, and legislators. They will provide theoretical and doctrinal resources to use in resolving crucial questions before and after the statutory recognition of same-sex couples is introduced in Hong Kong.
香港終審法院於 2023 年就 Sham Tsz Kit v Secretary for Justice 一案作出裁決。這一具有里程碑意義的判決要求政府在兩年內於成文法中引入對同性伴侶關係的法定承認。然而，終審法院賦予了政府相當的自由裁量空間，以決定前述承認的具體形式和內容。終審法院判決中裁定，「核心性」權利應被授予給同性伴侶，而「補充性」權利則可保留給已婚異性伴侶。然而，核心/補充權利之間的區別並沒有被定義。終審法院沒有對同性伴侶必須享有的基本權利和義務提供明確的指導。這種含糊性影響了法律的確定性，並可能對已經處於弱勢的少數群體帶來歧視。本項目旨在界定香港承認同性伴侶關係的法律制度所應涵蓋的基本權利和義務。為此，本項目將檢視在香港憲法中決定同性伴侶法律地位的憲法和人權架構，並將檢視討論過類似問題的歐洲人權法院判例。本項目亦會分析相關的國際人權法律。本項目將：(1) 探討核心性的，與補充性的權利和義務之間區別的意義、缺點和潛力；(2) 評估「家庭」這一法律概念的轉變及其重要性，並對這種轉變提出跨領域和多學科的批判；以及 (3) 檢視有關同性伴侶的平等法的演變。事實上，而且關鍵的是，終審法院似乎質疑了通過限制同性伴侶權利以保護傳統家庭的可能性，而終審法院的質疑亦可能削弱了這一通常為差別待遇提供理據基礎的論據。本項目將填補一個重要的知識缺口，並為全球範圍內的討論做出貢獻。本項目將定義：當憲法沒有規定同性婚姻時，必須授予同性伴侶的基本保障。這個問題是許多司法管轄區的共通問題，且至今仍未解決。本項目將透過多學科與交叉的方法來解決這個問題，並運用同性戀理論、社會學與人類學等理論。這種研究方法尚未用於研究香港法律。本項目的研究結果也將為法院、律師和立法者提供實務指引。在香港引入對同性伴侶的法定承認之前和之後，本項目的研究結果將為解決關鍵問題提供理論和教義學幫助。
|
