4 ms·
Funny how the constitution of China is not enforcible. You cannot sue the government against its violation of constitution. On the other hand no one believes in
by ttflee 8y ago
Funny how the constitution of China is not enforcible. You cannot sue the government against its violation of constitution. On the other hand no one believes in the political rights promised in constitution anyway.
Edit: I am prepared to be downvoted. Running China mostly depends on the use of administrative branches. The law enforcement agencies, the prosecution agencies and the the courts are all subdivisions of corresponding governments, under the direction of corresponding party committee. The people‘s congress should supervise the government, de jure. But that only happened in a parallel universe.
- justicezyx 8y agoNot sure why you think this will be down voted. We learn in junior (or senior highschool) China's legal systems has a few fundamental issues: 有法不依 (laws are ignored), 执法不严 (laws are not enforced effectively). Those basically cover the problem you mentioned about the government.
- doctorpangloss 8y agoThen the real question is why such a seemingly negative statement is favorable to the CPC. If we rehearse these lines as Westerners, are we repeating a piece of propaganda? I think so. My feeling is that the important narrative for the CPC is, “Everyone has it bad.” It keeps people from questioning why senior Party members have it so good and how.
- justicezyx 8y agoIt's not favorable It's just that these statements are taught to students, but they are not following the spirit of these statements either. Do what I do, not what I say. And people are not really having the mentality of behave according to rules and laws. I just point out that OP should not be down voted, as what op stared is universally known as a fact, it's just not only apply to government or rich and powerful.
- lozenge 8y ago"Everything is fine" would be laughed at and dismissed. The best message that will be even slightly accepted is that there is progress. So admitting the issues with the legal system is part of that narrative of progress and improvement.
- seniorivn 8y agoIts the opposite of the described above. Constitution is a set of regulations on governments power, to make sure that its not too powerful, but what you said is just like government is not strong enough or isn't enforcing it's rule strongly enough. See the difference?
- max76 8y agoIf a small percentage of people that break a law are held accountable than this abirtarty enforcement is a different type of power.
- est 8y agoNow it's more like 严格立法 普遍违法 选择执法 abusive laws, mass violations, selective enforcement.
- pasiaj 8y agoI took part in Helsinki University China Law week last spring, with prominent Chinese law scholars taking part. A professor from Peking University Law School told the audience how he had asked during a lecture is there anyone who cares about the Chinese constitution. Nobody reacted. After a moment of silence a student finally spoke up and said: "That's the wrong question. The question is, is there anyone who cares about the Chinese law in general."
- thaumasiotes 8y ago> You cannot sue the government against its violation of constitution. This is also true of the US government; it's the purpose of standing requirements.
- techsupporter 8y agoI’m not a legal scholar but I’m pretty sure Marbury v Madison pretty conclusively decided that the United States judiciary certainly does have the authority, through suit, to decide constitutionality of laws and to overturn actions that are contrary to the constitution.
- thaumasiotes 8y agoYou, as a citizen, cannot sue the government under the theory "the government is violating the constitution". In order to have standing to file the suit, you must have suffered a particular injury related to the government's illegal conduct; the fact that the government is violating the law is not considered an injury.
- karmasimida 8y agoThe US court had blocked the government's ban on asylum seeker, as an example from (very) recent memory.