With these premises, I would just like to pinpoint one or two basic ideas that Professor Canotilho brought to this auditorium. The first is the completely new perspective regarding the issues of Macau’s autonomy, and, as in many other situations when we address Macau, we can also similarly extend such observations to the sister Hong Kong SAR. This paper reminds me of another paper that Canotilho wrote more than a dozen of years ago, I believe, on the Joint Declaration and the Amparo writ, As palavras e os homens – reflexões sobre a Declaração Conjunta Luso- Chinesa e a institucionalização do recurso de amparo de direitos e liberdades na ordem jurídica de Macau, which was published several times in both Macau and Portugal. That paper was a landmark for the study of the Joint Declaration and of the Amparo institution; it opened brand new avenues of thought, of research, and of tentative solutions to complex juridical and political issues. I believe that a new avenue of research, and of legal reasoning, is also opened by the paper that Professor Canotilho rendered in this Seminar regarding the autonomy of the SARs.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Cardinal, P. (2009). Comments. In: Oliveira, J.C., Cardinal, P. (eds) One Country, Two Systems, Three Legal Orders - Perspectives of Evolution. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68572-2_51
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68572-2_51
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-68571-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68572-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)