File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1093/icon/moad034
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85164121850
- Find via
Supplementary
-
Citations:
- Scopus: 0
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Global constitutionalism and the People’s Republic of China: Dignity as the “fundamental basis” of the legal system?
Title | Global constitutionalism and the People’s Republic of China: Dignity as the “fundamental basis” of the legal system? |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 1-Apr-2023 |
Publisher | Oxford University Press |
Citation | International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2023, v. 21, n. 2, p. 433-460 How to Cite? |
Abstract | The People’s Republic of China has declared dignity to be a foundational norm of its legal system, as institutionalized through a suite of constitutional and legislative reforms. Indeed, the 2017–21 period saw the adoption of some of the most far-reaching statutes in the history of the PRC, the centerpiece of which is the new Civil Code (2021). In both structure and content, provisions of the Civil Code comprise a quasi-constitutional charter of rights. Indeed, many Chinese scholars do treat the Civil Code as such, developing sophisticated constitutional theory along the way. At the core of these claims is dignity, which occupies a prominent position within the Civil Code, and from which a host of additional rights, including unenumerated rights, can be derived. After situating these developments in light of global constitutional practice, we examine the emergence of dignity as an officially sanctioned commitment device, and analyze the pertinent scholarly discourse, structure, and content of the new Civil Code, and the various roles that the Communist Party of China, the National People’s Congress, and the Supreme People’s Court are expected to perform in supervising the work of the judiciary in operationalizing the Civil Code. We conclude that while the PRC has not fully embraced the dignity norm in the way other constitutional systems have, it has nonetheless permitted significant discursive debates that deserve to be analyzed comparatively. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/337188 |
ISSN | 2021 Impact Factor: 1.419 2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.493 |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Stone Sweet | - |
dc.contributor.author | Alec | - |
dc.contributor.author | Wan, Trevor T W | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-03-11T10:18:46Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-03-11T10:18:46Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023-04-01 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2023, v. 21, n. 2, p. 433-460 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1474-2640 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/337188 | - |
dc.description.abstract | <p>The People’s Republic of China has declared dignity to be a foundational norm of its legal system, as institutionalized through a suite of constitutional and legislative reforms. Indeed, the 2017–21 period saw the adoption of some of the most far-reaching statutes in the history of the PRC, the centerpiece of which is the new Civil Code (2021). In both structure and content, provisions of the Civil Code comprise a quasi-constitutional charter of rights. Indeed, many Chinese scholars do treat the Civil Code as such, developing sophisticated constitutional theory along the way. At the core of these claims is dignity, which occupies a prominent position within the Civil Code, and from which a host of additional rights, including unenumerated rights, can be derived. After situating these developments in light of global constitutional practice, we examine the emergence of dignity as an officially sanctioned commitment device, and analyze the pertinent scholarly discourse, structure, and content of the new Civil Code, and the various roles that the Communist Party of China, the National People’s Congress, and the Supreme People’s Court are expected to perform in supervising the work of the judiciary in operationalizing the Civil Code. We conclude that while the PRC has not fully embraced the dignity norm in the way other constitutional systems have, it has nonetheless permitted significant discursive debates that deserve to be analyzed comparatively.</p> | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | Oxford University Press | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | International Journal of Constitutional Law | - |
dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | - |
dc.title | Global constitutionalism and the People’s Republic of China: Dignity as the “fundamental basis” of the legal system? | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1093/icon/moad034 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85164121850 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 21 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 2 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 433 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 460 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1474-2659 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 1474-2640 | - |