Sun Yat Sen And Three Notable Chinese Characteristics Within The Chinese Constitutions

Master's Thesis from the year 2009 in the subject Law - Public Law / Constitutional Law / Basic Rights, grade: Pass (Original version), Queen Mary University of London, course: LL.M (Public Law), language: English, abstract: ‘Chinese characteristics’ has become a term commonly used to explain why China is different from the rest of the world. However, it has raised the question of whether China really is so different. In the field of constitutionalism, Sun Yat-Sen was the first Chinese politician who embraced Chinese characteristics and constructed the world’s first theory of democracy with ‘Chinese characteristics’ in the early twentieth century. His theory thus enlightens us on the question of whether China really is so different. Sun Yat-Sen’s theory of democracy consists of three notable ‘Chinese characteristics’ – the pentapartite separation of powers system, direct democracy with an institutional arrangement of representation, and the constitutional single party system. However, all of these ‘Chinese characteristics’ are rooted in Sun Yat-Sen’s misunderstanding of ‘Western’ democracy. It is even more troubling that the incompetent amendments made by Sun Yat-Sen, who was a physician, not only failed to democratise China, but also produced a permanent dictatorship in China. In addition, his allegation that China is different from the rest of the world is not substantiated by logic – any amendment which is based upon a misunderstanding of the original concept is logically false, regardless of who is the originator of the amendment.

This translation is made from the tenth edition of the Chinese book issued by the New Age Publishing Company with some of the errors of earlier editions corrected. In view of the prominent and influential position which The Three Principles of the People holds in the Chinese Nationalist movement and because of the difficulty involved in making passages for an abridged edition, Mr. Price has rendered a complete translation. The translation is faithful to the original and yet clear to the English reader. It will be of help to those who have read the book in Chinese and also to those who wish to know the English equivalents for Dr. Sun's ideas, terms and phrases. Three features not in the original Chinese text have been added in the translation: The number of paragraphs has been increased. A few brief notes have been added to explain generally unfamiliar names and references. A brief summary has been placed at the beginning of each chapter. This translation was originally issued under the auspices of the China Committee, Institute of Pacific Relations, as a volume of the "International Understanding Series" with the hope that it will promote a better understanding abroad of the great forces that are now driving China forward.

This book explains the details and underlying thinking of many major reforms to Chinese law and legal practice that have taken place since 2013. It draws widely on laws and regulations, policies, cases, official statistics as well as the latest Chinese and foreign literature. The informed analysis answers intriguing questions such as why China runs the world’s largest database of court judgments without recognising any precedent, or why the number of judges was cut by 40% despite a more than doubled caseload. Ultimately it offers a new approach on how to understand Chinese law and legal reforms in the contemporary world.

Which European and non-European ideas and practices facilitated the shaping of European unity? Or rather, which pursuits led to deadlocks in the cooperation between states? The book seeks answers to these questions by surveying the historical attempts at realizing supranational patterns of governance in Europe since the Middle Ages. The main focus is on the nineteenth and twentieth century organizational models of European unification. The analysis draws on an abundance of historical and legal source material. While the author encourages critical thinking about European integration, the exploration is admittedly based on specific values. Éva Bóka claims that the struggle for the humanization of power with its democratic creative force has been the major driver in the development of the system of liberties and the idea of European unity. The analysis of the historical process up to the Lisbon Treaty (2007) with the recognition of common, shared, and supported competences meets the author’s set of values to a great extent. The last part of the book examines whether the European Union can serve as a political and economic organizational model for other parts of the world.

The "war on terror" has generated a scramble for expertise on Islamic or Asian "culture" and revived support for area studies, but it has done so at the cost of reviving the kinds of dangerous generalizations that area studies have rightly been accused of. This book provides a much-needed perspective on area studies, a perspective that is attentive to both manifestations of "traditional culture" and the new global relationships in which they are being played out. The authors shake off the shackles of the orientalist legacy but retain a close reading of local processes. They challenge the boundaries of China and question its study from different perspectives, but believe that area studies have a role to play if their geographies are studied according to certain common problems. In the case of China, the book shows the diverse array of critical but solidly grounded research approaches that can be used in studying a society. Its approach neither trivializes nor dismisses the elusive effects of culture, and it pays attention to both the state and the multiplicity of voices that challenge it.