Discursive Illusions in Legislative Discourse: A Socio-Pragmatic Study

Abstract

This paper takes the position that interpretations of legal discourse are invariably taken in the context of socio-pragmatic realities to which a particular instance of discourse applies. What makes this process even more complicated is the fact that social realities themselves are often negotiated within the mould of one’s subjective conceptualisations of reality. Institutions and organisations, including people in power, often represent socio-political realities from an ideologically fuelled perspective, engendering many ‘illusory’ categories often a result of contested versions of reality. To substantiate this view, we discuss interpretations of a number of interesting contemporary and controversial laws, including America’s Patriot Act and Hong Kong’s proposed Article 23 of the Basic Law. Both laws can be seen as illustrative of the definitional conflict that abstract concepts such as democracy and human rights are subjected to in their own specific socio-political contexts. While America crowns itself with democracy and Hong Kong struggles to achieve it in effective synthesis with its unique political arrangement, the laws produced by both contrasting political systems are unexpectedly similar, aiming for the moderation of basic rights. The actions of both governments set against their beliefs and discourses, and furthermore set against one another and other media voices, particularly those of non-governmental organisations, political activists, and other socio-political groups, demonstrate contestation of realities, giving rise to ‘discursive illusions’, which seem to be interpreted not so much on the basis of their linguistic construction but more on the basis of socio-pragmatic factors, such as trust, belief, transparency, control and power.

Appendix

Section 239 of the Patriot Act 2001

Any person who is an official
	or employee(2)
of any department,
	agency, bureau, office, commission,
	or other entity (6)
of the Federal Government,
and any other person who is acting
	for or on behalf of any such entity(2),
who, directly
	or indirectly,(2)
in connection with the administration of this title,
corruptly demands,
	seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees(5)
to receive
	or accept (2)
anything of value personally
	or for any other person or entity (3)
in return for-
(1) being influenced in the performance of
any official act;
(2) being influenced to commit
	or aid in the committing, (2)
or to collude in,
	or allow any fraud, or make opportunity for (3)
the commission of any fraud, on the United States;
or
(3) being induced to do
	or omit to do (2)
any act in violation of the official duty of such official
	or person, (2)
shall be fined in an amount not more than 3 times
the monetary equivalent of the thing of value,
	or imprisoned for not more than 15 years, or both. (3)

1. (2 × 6 × 2 × 2 × 5 × 2 × 3) = 1,440
2. (1440 × 2 × 3) = 8,640
3. (1440 × 2 × 2) = 5,760
4. 1,440 + 8,640 + 5,760 = 15,840
5. 15,840 different ways of attracting 3 different kinds of punishment