{"title":"中国近代宪法与宪政谱系中的反讽","authors":"David K.C. Huang, Nigel N.T. Li","doi":"10.1163/2211906x-12030001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article juxtaposes modern Chinese constitutions and constitutionalism with constitutionalism chiefly developed in the West for clarity on the former’s lineage. As constitution is a concept foreign to China, there is no need for the country to enact any constitution unless it genuinely intends to embrace the true spirit of constitutionalism. A comparison of three signal Chinese constitutions yields an ironic, counterintuitive result, for the Constitution of the Republic of China is a refutation of the Nationalist Basic Law of the Political Tutelage Period (enacted in 1931), whereas the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, though enacted by the Communists, bears the legacy of the Nationalist Basic Law of the Political Tutelage.","PeriodicalId":38000,"journal":{"name":"Global Journal of Comparative Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Irony in the Lineage of Modern Chinese Constitutions and Constitutionalism\",\"authors\":\"David K.C. Huang, Nigel N.T. Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/2211906x-12030001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article juxtaposes modern Chinese constitutions and constitutionalism with constitutionalism chiefly developed in the West for clarity on the former’s lineage. As constitution is a concept foreign to China, there is no need for the country to enact any constitution unless it genuinely intends to embrace the true spirit of constitutionalism. A comparison of three signal Chinese constitutions yields an ironic, counterintuitive result, for the Constitution of the Republic of China is a refutation of the Nationalist Basic Law of the Political Tutelage Period (enacted in 1931), whereas the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, though enacted by the Communists, bears the legacy of the Nationalist Basic Law of the Political Tutelage.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Journal of Comparative Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Journal of Comparative Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/2211906x-12030001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Journal of Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/2211906x-12030001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Irony in the Lineage of Modern Chinese Constitutions and Constitutionalism
Abstract This article juxtaposes modern Chinese constitutions and constitutionalism with constitutionalism chiefly developed in the West for clarity on the former’s lineage. As constitution is a concept foreign to China, there is no need for the country to enact any constitution unless it genuinely intends to embrace the true spirit of constitutionalism. A comparison of three signal Chinese constitutions yields an ironic, counterintuitive result, for the Constitution of the Republic of China is a refutation of the Nationalist Basic Law of the Political Tutelage Period (enacted in 1931), whereas the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China, though enacted by the Communists, bears the legacy of the Nationalist Basic Law of the Political Tutelage.
期刊介绍：
The Global Journal of Comparative Law is a peer reviewed periodical that provides a dynamic platform for the dissemination of ideas on comparative law and reports on developments in the field of comparative law from all parts of the world. In our contemporary globalized world, it is almost impossible to isolate developments in the law in one jurisdiction or society from another. At the same time, what is traditionally called comparative law is increasingly subsumed under aspects of International Law. The Global Journal of Comparative Law therefore aims to maintain the discipline of comparative legal studies as vigorous and dynamic by deepening the space for comparative work in its transnational context.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
