The repeated call for a new constitutional convention is partly rooted in the fact the the current PRC constitution contains many contradictions and many omissions and also lack of implementation.
For instance, a peoples democratic dictatorship is contradictory in terms. The lexicon is a mere tribute paid to the classic Marxism that is out of place even in China.
An example of omission is the fact that the Chinese Peoples Political Consultative Council (CPPCC) has no actual constitutional basis. The often perception that the CPPCC is the upper chamber of Chinese legislature is invalid and the complaint that CPPCC is ineffectual is unjustified for it is not given the constitutional power.
An example of lack of implementation is the safeguard of peoples practising their civil and political rights as enshrined in the constitution. The arbitratry exercise of administrative power without adequate check and balance led to frequent outbreak of protests and sometimes riot. The latest example is from Wengan of Guizhou province where the peoples were storming the district government offices.
The problem is accute because there is no trusted channel for redress in the present arrangement and the enforcement officers are often regarded as corrupt and with contempt. The loss of public confidence is a critical issue which the CCP leadership has to restore.
The honesty, the devotion and the hardwork of the CCP cadre in the early revolutionary years, which earned the overwhelming public support and confidence were the reason why CCP trashed the corrupted KMT. Winning hearts is more crucial than winning the battles, CCP should know this well.
Another major reason for a new constitutional convention is because the present constitution is extremely weak in devising a sound political institutional framework and a compelling political vision statement commensurate with the Chinese's aspiration as an emerging benign world power and a harmonious country at home.
The generally less than positive image or perception of China in the western media cannot be all attributed to misunderstanding, prejudice and conspiracy alone. No amount of public relationship alone is going to change the status quo unless there is fundamental change in the system itself. The often underlined Chinese characteristic cannot be so far off from the universal value and practice.
I always find it sad and angry each time that the cuddly giant panda is caricatured with menancing eyes and posture as an innuendo of the political China today. This has to change not just because the bear itself is so cute, peace loving and cuddleable. More so, because China has the DNA to be as tolerant, respectable and inspirational.
That can start with a new constituional convention. A completely new constitution is catalyst to creating a nation that is harmonious internally and peaceful worldwide. This bring us back to refer to the five Chinese political theories of the last 100 years or so examined and posted in the month of May this year for some direction.
The evolving nature of the CCP leaders' politcal theories reflect the pragmatism of the succesive CCP leaders to adapt to the requirement of the days especially with the development of Deng-Jiang-Hu's theories which offer a more robust explanation legitimizing CCP's rule.
It is also not too unreasonable to suggest that the Deng-Jiang-Hu's theories are refining the peoples livelihood principle as propagated by Dr Sun's Three Peoples' Principles. This is perhaps the most developed aspect of Chinese political theory.
What is now more urgently required is however something closer to developing and refining the other two principles of Dr Sun's theory. On strictly a theoretical comparison, Dr. Sun is more thoughtful and coherent and surely it can be relied upon as a reference in deliberating the new constitutional requirement.
Its progressiveness is to be admired where he eloquently seek to introduce, for example, election, recall, initiative and referendum. Any of these are not present as a constitutional device in the PRC.
Dr Sun's separation of 5 powers maybe cumbersome but offer a useful reference to install a mechanism of check and balance. The current deployment of internal CCP disciplinary mechanism for checking abuses and corruption do not possess the quality of transparency, fairness and independence from actual or perceived political interference as one would have expected from a proper due process.
More importantly to China is to offer the compelling vision and reason for a single nationhood especially among the dissenters from Taiwan,Tibet and Xinjiang and other domestic critics.
On this, CCP has shown the flexibility with instituionalizing the regional autonomous government and one country two systems to hold the present China together. To take another bold step forward in whatever form is arguably the better way than the current one to foster one China nationhood.
The obssession with the one party rule is definitely another stumbling block to fostering one China. CCP has to make a decision whether CCP is for China or China is for CCP. The party and state relation is so interwined to prevent a proper governance in place.
Giving up ruling power hegemony, sharing power with others whether on a national or regional basis, allowing check and balances, submiting to people's mandate periodically, safeguarding civil and political right, guaranteeing free press, and redefining PLA as the nation's armed force and not as the party's militia are the concessions CCP has to make for China.
China is unusual in her nationhood experience where almost all other started with building the national institutional framework and process before or along with economic development. In my eye, China is about to undergo a political reengineering phase for the next 30 years.
The first 30 years of PRC (from 1949-1978) is the revolution age; the following 30 years (from 1979-2008) is the economic development age; the next 30 years, hopefully, is the political reconstruction age.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Wow! So much to read! As I continue reading, please allow me to recommend some writings by this cahp, Daniel Bell, who is a professor of political philosophy at Tsinghua University. I am reading his latest book (China's New Confucianism) which I intend to gift to you when I am done. He is quite insightful in his observations and research; but rather provocative some of his proposals. Most of all, he is a firm believer in China's classical thought (chiefly Confucianism but leavened with other schools) as the basis for China's future. Apparently, in one of his earlier books, "East meets West, Human Rights and Democracy in East Asia" he included a proposed constitutional framework for China based on Chinese traditions. Sounds interesting. He also wrote another book called, "Beyond Liberal Democracy: Political Thinking for an East Asian Context" on some other topics close to our discussion. I wonder if you have seen them around.
Bro KY, what you observed about the dichotomy between human, economic and social development of China and the development of its political unerpinnings is a good one. I must say I have not read the constituion of the PRC, but a lot of the issues you pointed out are beyond debate.
More than just a question of political structure and institutions, the question of the relation between the state and the individual (or even between the state and provinces, counties, local communities; and also between the people and those local apparatus of the state) are not resolved.
To take the example of how weakly sometimes the central government's policies - say on environmental standards - extends to the local level; or how often people sought to petition to even higher authorities (only to be intimidated and twarted by the intermediate levels); shows that the relations of the state to the people is very haphazard.
The contrast with many modern "state" is that first and foremost, the relationships between different levels of government are predominantly a legal one defined by a constitution and defended by the rule of law. Secondly, the rule of law provides each citizen a locus standi in his own right as an individual before the law. Thirdly, there are national instutuional mechanisms that over-rides the powers of the local government (e.g. agencies such as the Federal/Supreme Court, FBI, Environmental Protection Agency, FDA, Federal Reserves in the US).
I quite agree that the 3 National Principles of Dr Sun provides the most coherent amalgamation of old and new, Eastern and Western concepts. Particularly intersting consideration to traditional Chinese sensibilities in stressing material welfare to the people (min-shen) and the inclusion of an examination yuan.
But to go beyond a theory, it need to succeed in practice. I wonder how much of its actual practice can be seen from the example of Taiwan?
thank for recommending daniel bell. i have already reserved the book east meet west before i look at china new confucianism.
I am anticipating the month of august with excitement. thank to olympic, i am taking two weeks off for the family and also to catch up with reading and perhaps some thinking, if inspired.
we are planning a short trip to macao. I haven't been there since 2004 which mean I have not seen it first hand since macao is turned into a China's las vegas. Macao, despite its glittering casinos and resorts, is not without problems.
hope to write something after the visit in mid-august.
talking about dr sun's three principles. I commented brieftly in may that it isn't really implemented in true spirit. examination yuan and control yuan are essentially toothless. peoples welfare was neglected big time during suibian era. by the way, the three principles are generally regarded as KMT indoctrination by large majority when the schools kids prior to 90s were force to end every essay with a reflection of the principles. You may want to verify with your taiwanese friends but this was what I was told by the pan green friends that I know.
you are absolutely spot on, it is sometimes not just how elaborated or how sophisticated the constitution, but it has to do with execution of it and the onus is primariry with the honest and diligent officers. the people at large must also be able to trust it and live up to the the right and duty it confers. on this, america is par excellent.
i also agree with your observation on the central, provincial, local government relationship. this requires rigorous thinking before presenting a case. China is too complicated. A liberal democracy like Canada also have a problem with quebec, what about an autocratic china with significant minority in tibet and xinjiang. Even among the han who have experienced a different political systems demands accommodation. I am thinking hard what is the crux of the whole problem - at this momenet, i am inclined to believe that the fundamental problem is that between the party and state relationship in what i describe as " whether CCP for China or China for CCP".
Your plan for August is a well-deserved rest. Often I need at least half a day's rest and not doing anything to come up with any original thought. I recall a funny exchange between Obama and David Cameron the leader of the British Conservative Party, when it was mentioned that the key to succeeding in the White House is to have a few hours each day when nothing is scheduled so one can just spend time thinking. I quite agree even though for Ronald Reagan, it meant taking a nap.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/27/mic-picks-up-obama-and-ca_n_115201.html
-----
My personal intepretation of the 5 yuan structure in Dr Sun's Three National Principles is that it is very relevant to a modern government.
The administrative, legislative and legal yuan can be viewed as mirrors of the US style seperation of powers. Thats relatively straight-forward.
I also see the examination yuan as the basis of an professional, independent meritocratic civil service; an enhanced version of the Ke-qu system of the ancient times. This is one of the strengths of the British empire and many non-European places like India, Hong Kong, Singapore owes a lot of their success to this foundation. In theory, an independant professional meritocratic (and morally upright) civil service will provide a strong national framework for governance to counteract political winds and entrenched interests.
This idea is taken up further in Singapore and France where the best and brightest of each year of students are given special scholarships to top institutions of higher learning and having theri careers nurtured into a high-flying career path.
Interestingly, in France (and arguably also the old British reliance on OxBridge alumni for their civil service) the education curriculum for these elites is very much in the classical mould with focus on philosophy, history, politics, classical studies, literature etc. The idea seems to be to nurture the power of thinking and understanding of human nature rather than more narrowly technical subjects. I imagine Confucious, Socrates and Plato might agree.
The control yuan needs to be updated to become nation-wide mechanism or institutions on important aspects of governance. Earlier I mentioned some examples of federal bodies in the United States, such as the Federal Reserve (to protect the currency), SEC (to protect the functions of the financial markets), FBI (for cross-state crimes), FDA (for public safety in the trade of food and drugs) and so on. The difference here with the civil service is that these are technical areas not administrative or bureaucratic. In these areas, there is a good case for independant institutions of technical experts to protect the interests of the people.
If we look at the 5 yuan in this manner, one could see that Dr Sun is perhaps ahead of him time.
Post a Comment