The Constitutional Review System in China: Navigating Order, Rights, and Justice through Comparative Insights
Amid profound socio-economic transformation, China’s constitutional review system sits at the intersection of national order, individual rights, and evolving needs for justice. The mechanism is often viewed as different from the judicial review typical in common law systems and the constitutional courts typical in civil law systems, and thus largely symbolic or constrained (Zhu, 2009). However, recent developments, including establishing specialized review offices and responding to more citizen suggestions, indicate a cautious effort towards broader oversight. Yet, previous studies have focused on the system’s internal aspects, such as its centralized mode and weak form of review (Hand, 2011), while few have explored how it engages with society’s simultaneous expectations for maintaining national order and protecting individual rights. To narrow the research gap, this paper will specifically address the following questions: 1) What are the key features and rationales of the constitutional review system in China? 2) How can the system be improved to uphold diversity and equity?
This study analyzes the Chinese Constitution, Legislation Law, and related policies and practices, while also adopting a comparative legal perspective from common law systems (e.g., HKSAR) and civil law systems (e.g., Japan). The findings show that, on the one hand, China’s system underscores the importance of preserving the Constitution’s authority and the state’s order. On the other hand, the system is exclusively exercised by the National People’s Congress and its standing committee, embodying the people’s general will rather than transferring power to other bodies; it also allows individuals to request reviews, reflecting gradual advances in protecting fundamental civil rights. Moreover, this study suggests expanding participatory channels to promote diversity and equity. These findings offer insights into how Asian constitutional or legal systems might balance governance stability with social justice in changing times.