INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS, ACADEMIC DEBATES AND LEGAL PRACTICES ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW IN CHINA： 2000--2013
A special system of constitutional review, namely National People＇s Congress Review Model （the NPC Review Model） has been established since the 1982 Constitution. However, this system was criticized for its inactivity and has never been actually activated. After 2000, there are lots of efforts try t...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Frontiers of law in China Vol. 9; no. 4; pp. 636 - 656 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Beijing
Higher Education Press
01-01-2014
Higher Education Press Limited Company |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | A special system of constitutional review, namely National People＇s Congress Review Model （the NPC Review Model） has been established since the 1982 Constitution. However, this system was criticized for its inactivity and has never been actually activated. After 2000, there are lots of efforts try to improve the system of constitutional review of China, the results of the Qi Yuling case （2001） and the Luoyang seed case （2003） demonstrated that the U.S.-style of constitutional review is not and will not be accepted by the political system of China, while the results of the Sun Zhigang case （2003） and the Tang Fuzhen case （2009） proved that the existing NPC Review model cannot work very well if political leaders refuse to reform it. However, the experiences of the New Model of Parliamentary Sovereignty which was developed from Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canberra （the Australian Capital Territory）, and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China after 1980s, showed that a third way to protect human rights in a liberal democracy and to coordinate the relationship between legislature and court in a system of constitutional review. I believe the third way provides a good case for China to reform the existing constitutional review system without abandon its cherished tradition of the system of people ＇s congress. |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | CHENG Xueyang（ Soochow University, Suzhou 100097, China） A special system of constitutional review, namely National People＇s Congress Review Model （the NPC Review Model） has been established since the 1982 Constitution. However, this system was criticized for its inactivity and has never been actually activated. After 2000, there are lots of efforts try to improve the system of constitutional review of China, the results of the Qi Yuling case （2001） and the Luoyang seed case （2003） demonstrated that the U.S.-style of constitutional review is not and will not be accepted by the political system of China, while the results of the Sun Zhigang case （2003） and the Tang Fuzhen case （2009） proved that the existing NPC Review model cannot work very well if political leaders refuse to reform it. However, the experiences of the New Model of Parliamentary Sovereignty which was developed from Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canberra （the Australian Capital Territory）, and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China after 1980s, showed that a third way to protect human rights in a liberal democracy and to coordinate the relationship between legislature and court in a system of constitutional review. I believe the third way provides a good case for China to reform the existing constitutional review system without abandon its cherished tradition of the system of people ＇s congress. 11-5742/D |
| ISSN: | 1673-3428 1673-3541 |
| DOI: | 10.3868/s050-003-014-0040-1 |