From November 9 to 10, 2019, the third "China Constitution Youth Forum" sponsored by the Constitutional Law Research Association of China law society, hosted by Wuhan University School of Law and co-sponsored by Guangdong Mingsi law firm, editorial department of Law Review and editorial department of China Law Review was held in the old library of Wuhan University. With the theme of "constitutional procedural law", nearly 150 experts and scholars from Tsinghua University, Renmin University of China, University of political science and law of China, University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Zhejiang University and other universities and scientific research institutions conducted academic discussions on the four units including constitutional review procedure, filing review system, constitutional petition and constitutional review.
Professor Jiang Guohua presided over the opening ceremony on the morning of November 9. Sun Deyuan, the secretary of the party committee of Wuhan University school of law, pointed out that the third Youth Forum on constitutional law not only affirmed the development of the discipline of law science of Wuhan University, especially the constitutional law, but also supported the cultivation of legal talents of Wuhan University. In the view of professor Han Dayuan, it was necessary to form a system of the discipline and realize the refinement of practical research. Only with the continuous emergence and growth of young scholars could the China's constitutional law develop well. Professor Qin Qianhong stressed that we should strengthen the implementation and supervision of the constitution, promote constitutional review, and strengthen the filing review system. Professor Zhang Xiang explained the theme of the third "China Constitution Youth Forum". He said that the study of constitutional procedural law had a strong effect in the construction of the current constitutional review process.
The theme of the first unit of the forum was "principles of the construction of the filing and review system". The hosts were Professor Wu Jiaqing from the law school of South China University of technology, and professor Yao Guojian from the law school of China University of political science and law, and the speaker was Zheng Lei, an associate professor of Guanghua Law School of Zhejiang University.
Zheng Lei first introduced the practice of "record review", and said that the measures to promote record review had achieved considerable results. However, the corresponding problems also appeared. We must find the key problems in the systematic principle research.
In the evaluation, five reviewers expressed their opinions on the theme report. Professor Wang Xu pointed out that the construction of filing review system may face the challenge of China constitution structure and the mechanism of "mixed constitution". Professor Zhao Qian from Southwest University thought that the connotation of system was worth discussing. According to Zou Yi, an associate professor of law school of Sichuan University, the theoretical innovation of the article was limited, and the basic structure need to be refined. Dr. Jiang Qinghua, who was from Central South University, put forward some suggestions about the title, the research object of the paper. Dr. Su Shaolong said that the "full coverage" and "systematization" in the article were lack of description to the core elements such as the identification and review standards of normative documents.
The theme of the second unit of the forum was "democratic function of the constitution review process". The hosts were professor Liu Maolin and professor Li Haiping. The speaker was professor Wang Jianxue.
Wang Jianxue pointed out that the current constitution review mechanism lay in the gap between the democratic constitutional text and the bureaucratic practice of the political system, and the contradiction was also due to the conflict and tension between the two. Therefore, the real constitution review must grow up with the continuous growth of socialism democracy. To improve the constitution review system, it was necessary to make full use of its democratic function.
In the evaluation, professor Qin Xiaojian thought that the article lacked the refinement of constitutional logic on constitutional review procedure and democratic relations in general. Professor He Yonghong proposed that the thinking of "the primary motive of the petitioner of constitution review" completely dispelled the original legal function of "constitution review". Professor Li Cheng pointed out that the concept of "constitution review procedure" was not reflected in the report. According to Dr. Li Binghui, there was a tendency of over generalization of democracy in the thesis. Dr. Duan Lei pointed out that there were many points to be discussed in the process of explaining the three key words of review, democracy and procedure in the thesis.
The forum also had a sector of pre-meal report. Li Dapeng, a lawyer from Shenhao law firm, reported on the topic of "constitution judgment and judicial judgment - Analysis of the relationship between the two procedures".
Mr Li introduced the constitutional procedural law of Spain in details. The limitations, status and needs of the Spanish constitutional court made it carry out three kinds of relations in the interaction with the general court: "two-way assistance", "assistance and control" and "the real conflict and settlement".
The theme of the third unit of this forum was "subjective public rights, litigation rights and constitutional appeal rights". The host was professor Hu Honghong and professor Chen Yanguang. The speaker was professor Zhao Hong.
Professor Zhao Hong first introduces the motivations and basic logic of the paper. Then, from the perspective of procedural law, he drew out the litigious right and the realization of the litigious right, so as to show the complex evolution and intricate connection between the subjective public right and the litigious right of public law. Finally, the paper summarized the enlightenment of the German legal system on the construction of the constitution review procedure in China.
In the evaluation, Liu Lianjun said that the description of subjective public rights and interests was not closely related to the litigious right and the constitution right of appeal. Professor Zhu Jie said that the concept of "the function of basic rights" should be used to construct the core connotation of the litigious right, and the theory of public law needed to be refined. Mr. Jin Yin, an assistant professor of Law School of Renmin University of China, thought that the article should introduce the background of German subjective public rights, social system of government and state organization form. Dr. Feng Wei thought that the article should define the basic concept of "procedural and institutional rights". Dr. Ye Qiang raised six questions from the perspective of the deduction logic of the litigious right.
The theme of the fourth unit of the forum was "request for constitutional review of judicial organs: principle development and system concept". The host were professor Sun Daxiong, professor Wang Guanghui, and the speaker was Huang Mingtao, an associate professor of Wuhan University school of law,.
Associate professor Huang Mingtao discussed how the Supreme People's court should exercise the right of constitutional review in order to start the "specific review procedure" in the sense of system design. From "constitutional supervision" to "constitutional review" was the response and return to the general principles of constitutionalism. Under the current constitutional framework, further procedural construction and practical exploration of specific review would definitely strengthen the "normative" of the constitution.
In the evaluation, professor Chen Yunsheng said that the requirements of constitutional review put forward by the Supreme People's court were essentially different from the "bill" of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. Professor Yang Xiaonan said that instead of discussing the advantages of "specific review" in the process of implementing the constitution, it was better to discuss the particularity and importance of the Supreme People's court compared with other state institutions. Liang Hongxia said that the paper could explain the limitation of constitutional interpretation in detail. Dr. Zhu Xuelei consider that the discussion on the necessity of specific examination could be carried out in combination with relevant cases in China. According to Dr. Tian Wei, the focus should be turned to the specific institutional design of the specific normative review.
The closing ceremony of the forum was presided over by Zhang Xiang, the secretary general of China Constitutional Law Research Association. Professor Tu Zhenyu from Law School of Nanjing Normal University made a summary of the meeting. Professor Tu pointed out that the four units of the forum were wonderful, full of content and rigorous demonstration, which inspired the scholars to have a very fierce ideological collision. He mentioned that the constitutional review had already entered the scope of academic research as early as 40 years ago. The discussion of today was also the best commemoration and remembrance of the predecessors.
Secretary general Zhang Xiang made a brief summary of this forum, and proposed that the significance of discussing the constitutional procedural law lay in the practical needs. The four units of this forum was a very important beginning. It was reported that the Fourth Youth Forum on constitutional law would be held in the Law School of the Central University of Finance and economics in 2020.
Edited by Su Yi & Wu Liuqing
