Abstract
Unitary states such as the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter given as China) and Finland are much less monolithic in terms of institutional design than the reference to the unitary nature of the state indicates.1 Although this may be a surprise to the outside observer, the flexibility in the internal state structure signals an implementation of the wish in both countries to recognize the existence of different minorities and population groups inside their national territories.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Chen, Albert H.Y. (2009). “The Theory, Constitution and Practice of Autonomy: The Case of Hong Kong”, inj. Costa Oliveira and P. Cardinal (eds), One Country, Two Systems, Three Legal Orders — Perspectives of Evolution. Essays on Macau’s Autonomy after the Resumption of Sovereignty by China. (Springer Verlag: Berlin & Heidelberg), pp. 23–50.
Fu, Hualing, Lison Harris and Simon Young. (2007). “Introduction”, in Hualing Fu, L. Harris and SNM Young (eds), Interpreting Hong Kong’s Basic Law — The Struggle for Coherence. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 78–91.
Ghai, Yash. (1997). Hong Kong’s New Constitutional Order — The Resumption of Chinese Sovereignty and the Basic Law 1st ed. (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press).
Ghai,Yash. (1999). Hong Kong’s New Constitutional Order — The Resumption of Chinese Sovereignty and the Basic Law 2nd ed. (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press).
Leung, Mei-fun P. (2006). The Hong Kong Basic Law: Hybrid of Common Law and Chinese Law. (Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia: LexisNexis).
Morris, Robert J. (2007). “Forcing the Dance — Interpreting the Hong Kong Basic Law Dialectically”, in Hualing Fu, L. Hanis and SNM Young (eds), Interpreting Hong Kong’s Basic Law — The Struggle for Coherence. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 67–89.
Palmgren, St en. (1997). “The Autonomy of the Aland Islands in the Constitutional Law of Finland”, in L. Hannikainen and F. Horn (eds), Autonomy and Demilitarisation in International Law: The Aland Islands in a Changing Europe. (The Hague, London & Boston: Kluwer Law International), pp. 98–103.
Suksi, Markku. (1998). “On the Entrenchment of Autonomy”, in Suksi M (ed.), Autonomy: Applications and Implications. (Dordrecht: Kluwer Law International).
Suksi, Markku. (2005). Alands konstitution (Âbo: Âbo Akademis förlag).
Suksi, Markku. (2008). “Stegvisa förändringar i Älandsöverenskommelsens inne-hâll?”, in M. Aarto and M. Vartiainen (eds), Oikeuskansainvälisessä maailmassa-Ukka Saraviidan juhlakirja. (Edita: Helsinki).
Suksi, Markku. (2011). Sub-state Governance through Territorial Autonomy (Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag)(forthcoming).
Weiyun, Xiao. (2001). One Country, Two Systems-An Account of the Drafting of the Hong Kong Basic Law (Beijing: Peking University Press).
Xiaoping, Deng. (2004). On “One Country, Two Systems” (Hong Kong: Joint Publishing).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Markku Suksi
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Suksi, M. (2014). Autonomous Areas as a Constitutional Feature in the People’s Republic of China and Finland. In: Lluch, J. (eds) Constitutionalism and the Politics of Accommodation in Multinational Democracies. St Antony’s Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137288998_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137288998_10
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-45003-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-28899-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political Science CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)