Constitutional Order in Changing Societies
In the second half of 20th Century, Samuel P. Huntington, a western political master of political science, systematically studied the issues on the political stability of developing countries during 1950s~1960s. His findings are mainly incorporated in his book named "Political Order in Changing Societies" in which many ideas aroused extensive concern of people at that time. As stated in his book, there is possibility of concurrence of political decadence and political development in the developing countries. What the newly independent countries actually experienced was the increasingly intensive social and political disorder... Undoubtedly, all these are the main causes of rebellion, military coup, weakness and inefficiency of government. Huntington urged that the third world countries shall establish authoritarian government to maintain political stability. Certainly, it reflected people's political demands at that time. On the contrary, another western figure Fukuyama also made points about political order. However, to the utmost, he fairly defended his theory of liberal democracy and even considered the order of liberal democracy to be the last governance order of mankind. These two theories stood opposite each other at one time. Putting aside the crucial impact of their interests and standpoints on the orientation of theories, as a matter of fact, both Huntington and Fukuyama neither mentioned the constitutional order nor conducted any in-depth study on the constitutional mechanism that might cause the social turbulence and political destabilization. Thus, obviously, their theories have the limited applicability and explanatory power in terms of current political situations. It can be seen that, currently, the modernization is always carried out together with other reforms in the same time-space domain. "Most of countries are exerting the dominion in the name of constitution and law. Although institutional availability and operating mode of constitutional system are different from country to country, all nations, without exception, are strictly controlling interests expression and political participation by means of constitution, such as the activities organized by political parties and interests groups, and the social movements. The ideology or regime considers modernization and economic growth as the main objectives." Undoubtedly, it forms the distinct constitutional features of constitutional movements in our times. Constitutional order refers to justicial social order built up on the basis of humble "rule of law" spirit, reflecting meritorious functions of modern democracy and realistic human care for safeguarding human rights. It is an ideal target of social values and also an actual harmonious status of civil life. Therefore, starting from the new trends and new features of current constitutional movements in different countries, this paper specifically discussed and analyzed the theoretical and practical issues about how to ensure the modern countries steadily and orderly pushing forward their constitutional reforms, and how to maintain the dynamic and stable constitutional order in their countries.
I. Global Constitutional Tide
Since the second half of the 20th century, the productivity and production relationship of global economy have changed essentially. The trend of economic globalization and internationalization of political social life is increasingly emerging, which are reflected in the constitutional field by various constitutional reform measures adopted by different countries. The global constitutional movements show unprecedented new trends and new features.
1. Unceasingly surging democratization waves
Since 1980s, the world has set off a wave of democratization. Just as Huntington stated, "the democratization is the most magnificent and significant political transition throughout the history of mainkind. In terms of development speed, "the third wave" of democratization created a "miracle": the democratization experienced a decade in Poland, 10 months in Hungary, 10 weeks in East Germany, 10 days in Czechoslovakia, and only 10 hours in Romania". In fact, "the third wave" of democratization can be considered as the "swan song" of the 20th century. In terms of the range of influenced, almost all countries in the world were influenced by this tide of democratization, and more than 120 countries have established the so-called democracy. The trend is ongoing even in the 21st century.
On March 24, 2008, the Kingdom of Bhutan, a country located at the foot of the Himalaya, the first time in its history, held the national congress election, and over 200,000 citizens voted on that day. After the election, the constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy officially replaced its 100-year-old hereditary monarchy. As provided in the Bhutan's constitution, "the exercise of royal power shall be strictly limited and bonded, and the parliament has the right to impeach and dismiss the kingdom". Coincidentally, two months later, constitutional democracy movement also happened in Bhutan's neighboring country, Nepal. On May 28, 2008, the constitutional convention was held in Katmandu, capital of Nepal. Under the agreement of three major parties, a nominal position was set up to replace the kingdom. The majority of state power is centralized on the premier. Former King Gyanendra Shah was compelled to leave his palace and became an ordinary citizen. Since then, the House of Shah of Nepal of 239 years of history announced its end... The national system of Nepal was transformed from the monarch into the republicanism.
Monarch is a normal political phenomenon in the course of human civilization. We can also say, monarch is a kind of political mode that most of countries experienced. For traditional societies, facing the cruel reality that the Law of Jungle was everything, the monarch which was built on the firm foundation of individual authority and "centralized power" set the stage for the continuation and development of specific nations at that time, even though the query about the "legality" of traditional monarch of "having authority but no liberty" never disappear. So, the new wave of democratization brought an unprecedented and tremendous shock to the traditional monarch. Moving forward from the tradition to the modern, it is an inevitable history and realistic choice of f all countries that are moving forward.
2.Constitutional government has a long way to go.
In the 1990s, some scholars pointed out that, the western liberal democracy has surmounted the ideologies of hereditary monarch, authoritarianism and fascism ect., and has came into "the end of human ideological progress" and "the ultimate form of human government", so the "end of history" came into being. However, in fact, as far as the actual situation of constitutional reforms currently ongoing in the western countries concerned, the theory of the "end of history" is not true.
Taking Russia for example, when the former Soviet Union announced its disintegration after "8·19 Incident" in 1991, the constitution and the laws were abolished at once. Russia rapidly turned to the track of western political and economical operation and development. Yeltsin was elected as the first president of Russia, which marked the beginning of presidential government mode of Russia. At the beginning, due to poor division of power between the president and the parliament, the shade of former Soviet Union still had a great existence in the political structure at that time, which was mainly manifested as: compared with the president, the parliament of Russia at that time seemed to have the superior power. In many cases, the president had to get the authorization from the parliament before exercising his power. So Yeltsin proposed to amend the constitution in order to expand his power and to make the Russia a country of completed western presidential government. However, lots of members of the parliament were adamant in their opposition to his proposal. The event developed into an open clash of two big power organs and even triggered the incident of "October Bloodshed. Later, the winner president Yeltsin carried out a series of measures to weaken the power of the parliament and to further enhance his dominant position. In 1993, the country passed the new constitution by referendum, through which the power of the president was expanded to the extreme. According to the constitution, the president shall have the right to "decide the basic direction of domestic and foreign policies" and the right to "issue orders and directives which the whole country must execute"; besides that, the president shall have the staffing rights of significant positions of all central organs of the federation, but also shall have the forceful veto power to the parliament and the right to dismiss the State Duma, etc. On the contrary, the parliament's restraints on the president became very limited. Putin carried forward this constitution reforming policy as a whole after taking the office, and conducted a series of political restructures involving the federal system and the upper house composition under the general frame of the constitution. In a word, the centralized presidential government has always been the principle orientation of Russian political reform until now. But there are different opinions about this in the academic circle, like someone thinks that, "through the top-down constitutional reform, a complete constitutional system was established overnight. But the current presidential government lacks a legal foundation. The constitution clearly provides for separation of three powers, but the struggles among them are parochial. The struggles between the president and the parliament mainly reflect the struggles between small groups and individuals, with the general interests of the country and society not been addressed yet. On the face of it, the constitutional connotation and the realistic constitutional order behind the constitutional reform that Russia has being carried forward till today and the consequent government mode could not be simply realized through the relevant system establishment. As a matter of fact, the constitutional government of Russia still has a long way to go.
3.Human Rights are no longer dreams.
After the Second World War, the "United Nations Charter" stipulated clearly on the international protection of human rights. On Dec. 10, 1948, the UN Assembly issued an international document interpreting the human rights – "Universal Declaration of Human Rights". The spirit of safeguarding human rights embodied in these international documents is not only the reflection of common values of people nowadays, but also is the basic criterion to judge the human right status of sovereign states. Later, with the emerging national liberation movements worldwide, a great batch of developing countries stood on the international stage of human rights. By taking the majority of seats in the UN Assembly, they put forward their demands for human rights in aspects of economy, society and culture. In 1996, the UN Assembly passed another two international human rights conventions, "International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights" and "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" as well as the "Optional Protocol" (hereinafter referred to "two international covenants of human rights" for short). In details, the "two international covenants of human rights" and the aforesaid "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" are different in both the contents and the legal effects. If we can tell that, the Declaration reflects that the developed nations and the developing nations are eliminating the differences with respect to the protection of human rights and reaching the consensus on the human right dialogues, the "International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights" mainly reflects the human right demands of developing countries, while the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" and the "Optional Protocol" mainly reflect the interest demands of western countries for human rights protection; moreover, in the terms of legal effects, the Declaration is just a principle declaration issued by the UN with no realistic legal binding force to the member countries. While different from it, the "two international covenants of human rights" are multilateral legal documents, laying out clear stipulations of contracting states' legal obligations and responsibilities on safeguarding and promoting human rights, which have exact legal binding force. In addition, the "two international covenants of human rights" also stipulated a complete legal implementing mechanism of contracting states reporting system, nations' accusing system and individual appealing system etc., with a specified agency "Human Rights Committee" established for supervising the obligation implementing status of contracting countries. Therefore, the "two international covenants of human rights" provide the international protection of human rights with the legal basis for common application and clear jurisdiction, marking primarily formulation of international human rights legal system. In addition, the UN Assembly passed the "Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action" which further addresses the universality of the human rights, further improving the international regulations and specifying standards on the human rights protection. It is predictable that the particularity of international human rights protection will be gradually reduced while the universality enlarged.
Moreover, the connotation of human rights has been continuously expanded and the systemic level upgraded greatly. Just as a scholar described, "human rights are no longer an abstract theory or a faraway dream; instead they have turned into tangible in national laws and international laws of agency, personnel, rules, funds, interpretations, prosecutions, debates, trails, judgments, executions and sanctions. Despite the fact that in some circumstances, conflicts arising from geopolitics, international interests or even individual interests would differ the reality from the desired justice to certain extent, an authoritative agency, formalized procedures and regulatory operations are far more practical than extract theories for advancing the course of the human rights. By following this tendency, many nations have stipulated the safeguarding of human rights in their national constitution. For instance, China clearly stipulates in its constitutional amendment passed in 2004 that "the state respects and protects human rights". In a word, after decades of postwar development of human rights, the international human rights protection has shown new trends and new features, and the safeguarding of human rights has became the key target of promoting the constitutional government of countries in the world.
4. Rule of law has become the common view.
Currently, the idea of rule of law becomes more and more outstanding with consensuses being formed. With the "dynamic constitutional mechanism" as the basic contents, the constitutional reform activities are constantly pushed forward by countries with their own characteristics. In the developing process of the modern society, the idea of rule of law is the outcome of the human civilization and rational practice. Essentially, the formation of constitutional consensuses greatly depends on the manifestation and realization of mutual idea of rule of law. Today, with the highly development of modern civilization, the idea of rule of law has been accepted gradually and became a common view. Taking the United States for instance, during its presidential election of 2008, which placed a profound influence to the country, when the campaign of Bush and Goerl finally concentrated in the Florida...because the votes of both candidates were almost equal, the election came to a deadlock...at that time, the US Supreme Court intervened in the presidential election for the first time in its history and made the final judgment. Just as someone commented later, "the presidential candidate of Democratic Party Goerl may still feel not OK with it, but he announced to the public that he will accept the judgment of the Court." So we can see that, the idea of rule of law is deep rooted in American's mind. The function of the constitutional order was fully reflected in this case.
Responding to it, the famous American writer Toms Friedman wrote articles to complain of unfairness for Goerl and claim the injustice judgment made by the Supreme Court, but he also lauded the practice of the rule of law of US based on the judicial authority. As he preached that, "the secrete (of America's success) is the long tradition of rule of law and the systems behind this. Because of this, everybody can get full development no matter who is in power...we carried on the excellent legal and institutional system." As what he stated, United States is the pioneer of codified constitution, and its constitution is undoubtedly one of the greatest achievements that the American contributed to the world political system, so that the United States grows into the unique superpower of the world within about 200 years. "What is it that facilitates the development of US in this rapid speed? Perhaps, there be lots of factors, but we have to admit that the principle and system of rule of law set by the US constitution have played the key roles." In my opinion, the US constitutional order is maintained on the one hand due to the constant improvement and development of the system and order driving by the professional development of the constitution, and on the other hand, it also benefited from the further strengthened idea of rule of law and consensuses on the constitutional government. The current trend of the realistic constitutional government shows besides that the position of the constitution as the fundamental law of governing a country is further confirmed and consolidated and the constitutional system plays greater and greater roles in the actual operations of constitutional government, the constitutional activities taking the "dynamic constitutional mechanism" as the core contents are constantly advanced and promoted in countries with their own characteristics and become the eternal demand and inexhaustible power of current constitutional reforms. Driven by this power, the constitutional reform activities in all nations are constantly stepping forward orderly in their own characteristics.
II Unrest and crisis in constitutional movements
As aforementioned, a new round of constitutional movements has converged into a tempestuous global tide, spreading to almost every country. With the combined foundation of the traditional authoritarian government and military regime gradually destroyed, great changes have taken place in the nature, structure, system, operation and various other levels of the constitutional government. The actual constitutional practices show us that: the old order has been broken, but the new order has not come into being yet. During this process, particularly as the diverse elements are interacting, impacting and infiltrating each other, what follows is the radical social unrest and political crisis.
1.Constitutional reforms in different countries are facing complex and volatile external environment and unstable internal environment due to the wrestle between globalization and anti-globalization, terrorists, regional conflicts, wars, etc.
The tide of economic globalization and internationalization of society, politics and civil life surging from the second half of the 20th century pushed the development of the world economics and politics to a completely new stage. The globally economic liberalization came into the top priority of countries to set up their policies and measures. What comes with it is a surge of anti-globalization. We can tell that, behind the phenomenon that every country is adapting itself to the trend of globally economic liberalization, there is a universal social reality we have to face that the wealth gap is getting enlarged. Therefore, responding to the economic freedom, the calls for the economic equality is also getting louder. "Viewing from the changing situations of the world political pattern, with the drastic changes of Eastern Europe, the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Yalta System... the world pattern shows a trend of ‘single-polarization and multipolarization'." Following with this trend, the antagonism of the hegemonism and anti-hegemonism always gets demonstrated in the current international societies. For example, after the Cold War, the regional conflicts and wars occurred in succession in Somalia, Balkan and Middle East area caused severe humanitarian sufferings.
In the 1990s, the Gulf War, the US and UK's war against Iraq, and the US-led NATO's bombardment in Yugoslavia...particularly, after the "9·11" terrorist incident, US locked its anti-terrorism target on the Taliban regime of Afghanistan. Under the permission of the UN, US immediately launched the anti-terrorism wars on Afghanistan, and destroyed the state government of Afghanistan by arms. Later, US and UK set out troops to Iraq and very soon toppled the Saddam regime and executed Saddam. Lots of scholars criticized this from the perspective of human rights protection: "the Iraq wars initiated by the US surly trampled on the basic principle of international human rights law and brought extremely negative and bad influence to the human rights protection...the prison abuses by American troops further exposed the hideous nature of the war of trampling human rights." Now, Iraq is promoting its rebuilding plan of constitutional government under the guidance of the hegemony theory of America. However, there is every sign that the situation in Iraq is still severe, and its constitution government seems to be far away. As the cover story of the "Weekly Standard" of 28 July 2008 says, "the political situation of Iraq is still out of joint, leaving full of uncertainties there." So we can see, the current constitutional reforms in countries all over the world are facing unprecedented great challenges from external environment. All elements result in the unstable political situations in every country.
2. Government elites, imbalanced political powers, armies, political parties, and all non-governmental sectors are involved in this reform, aggravating the volatility of this constitutional movement.
As a matter of fact, the power distribution in the constitutional reform is imbalanced in different countries. Taking Bhutan for example, the main motive force of its constitutional reform is the kingdom, a true political elite. "Over the years, generations of kings have been keeping giving up the power in their hands gradually to return the state power to the civilians." Looking at the whole process of social change in Bhutan, you will see that its constitutional reform was conducted and accomplished in a peaceful environment all the time. Different from Bhutan, the constitutional transition of Nepal was finished in a violent political competition. On the one hand, the former king of Nepal kept promoting political measures to enhance his kingship and military power during the constitutional reforms and even attempted to build a new government under his leadership through personal arbitrary dictation; on the other side, all political party powers uncompromisingly fought against the autocratic regalia, but at the same time, they hold different opinions about how to set up a constitutional system. Moreover, the interference of the international community is also an important contributing factor of the final accomplishment of the constitutional government. Until the agreement against autocratic regalia was reached, the political deadlock lasting for several months was over.
At present, the political situation of Thailand attracted more attention. Since the military coupe in 2006, in the following year of 2007, the Surayud provisional government reshuffled the cabinet twice with one turbulence after another. In August, 2007, the new constitution was passed. And in December of the same year, the People Power Party (PPP) won the presidential election. At the beginning of 2008, the PPP associated with other parties established the new government. But the situation of Thailand was not thus stabilized; instead it remains turbulent today. For instance, in April, 2009, the East Asia Summit planned to be held in Thailand had finally to be cancelled because of the internal turbulence of Thailand. So we can see that the baneful influence has enlarged from the internal to the external. In fact, companying with the political turbulence, the economy of Thailand also gets a hard hit. It is said that, "the economy of Thailand maintains slow growth; the economic growth rate of 2007 is only 4.8%."
As we all know, the military coup of Thailand has its special political and historical causes. The populace is another powerful force taking part in the country's reform. Thailand society suffers in the pernicious alternation of the elitism and the populism. Associated social abuses include that "election briberies, conflicts and even violent events are happening in broad daylight, and such dark sides caused the negative consciousness opposed to democracy, and became the breeding ground of authoritarian politics." The Thailand phenomenon shows us that, within all countries in the transforming time, if the political elites, imbalanced political powers, armies, parties, and all non-governmental sectors are involved in this tide, it will definitely aggravate the complexity and volatility of this global constitutional movement.
3. The systematic defects and functional drawbacks of constitutional movement caused political destabilization and local turbulence.
France is the earliest country in Continental Europe setting up the codified constitution. In the current constitutional system of France, there is a president with fairly concentrated power, but its political situation also shows unrest. In the presidential election of 2002, the most competitive candidates were the current president Chirac, the premier Jospin and the rightist front national chairman Le Pan. However, the leader of the far-right party known to take "French First" as its slogan, Le Pan won the first round of voting unexpectedly, which hit the headlines of European presses and remarked as "an earthquake of French politics", "the 9·11 of Europe" "a brick thrown into the pool of European democracy" and even sarcastically "unless the French have lost their minds, as a country which likes to lecture people on democracy and human rights, it is hard to imagine France having this confusion and ridiculous situation." So far as this case is concerned, although Le Pan was failed at last, a lot of people expressed their concerns: "Le Pan phenomenon" highlights a new crisis of European traditional democratic politics, and it will undoubtedly be a tough mission for European politicians to stop this phenomena from overspreading and growing worse.
Several years ago, an influential presidential impeachment also happened in Korea. Roh Moo-hyun took the presidential office on Feb. 25, 2003, and was later implicated in the scandal of his trusted follower who illegally collected political funds....When the Korean procuratorial organ's investigation results came fundamentally clear, the Grand National Party advanced the proposal for impeachment on March 9, 2004. And on March 12, the Korean national assembly passed the proposal by absolute majority of two-thirds votes...after the president was suspended, his duties devolved on the premier...On May 14 of the same year, the Korean constitutional court intervened in the judgment and decided the case to reject the proposal of impeachment, and the case was finally closed. According to the final settlement of this case, it seems the decision of the constitutional court appeased the political conflicts, Roh Moo-hyun also restored the presidential power, and the political crisis was dissolved at last. However, by looking at the whole process of the case, it was full of variability and suspicion, ups and downs, and caused a big shock to the political situation in Korea.
Looking back upon the presidential election of US in 2000, the main conflicts of the Democratic Party and the Republican Party focused on whether the manual recount was legal and valid. However, there is no clear provision about this in the federal laws, neither in the laws of Florida. So the legality or validity of the manual recount became a highly controversial matter at that time. In fact, it was not just a technical issue, but related to the rule settings of the democratic practice and the value of constitutional government. So we can see that the systematic and functional drawbacks reflected in the constitutional dynamic operation and practice can also cause political unrest and local turbulence within certain ranges. Of course, we can also predict that, with the modern technical revolution developing with every passing day and the social conditions changing momently, new problems will surely be further highlighted, which will undoubtedly cause new challenges to every country in promoting constitutional government in terms of value and system.
III Constitutional Order: Justicial demand of changing societies
In the current changing societies, the crisis and political unrest will be bound to cause highly intensive political situation. Just like the American scholar Owen Yang described, "a normal political process is suddenly interrupted, lasting for a short time, rising possibility of violence, and exerting a great influence on the stability of some systems (or relation patterns) of international politics." To maintain a stable political situation and order is a realistic topic currently facing all countries, especially the developing ones.
1.Huntington's political order theory and its dilemma
Huntington's political order theory is mainly embodied in his book "Political Order of Changing Societies", in which, he concluded from deep researches on the real situations of developing countries during the 1950s~1960s that, "...just like the economic growth in some ways relies on the relation between investment and consumption, the political order in some ways relies on the development of the political system and on whether new social power can be mobilized to join in the politics." In Huntington's opinion, the reason why some developing countries are in turbulence is not that they are poor and backward; instead it is that they are trying to realize the modernization, which is the root of their unstable politics. According to this logic, the social status of highly traditional and of highly modernization would be similarly stable and ordered, and those in the process of modernization would be more likely to be instable and disorderly. So he set a proposition that "modernity produces stability, while modernization causes destabilization." and "the instable politics is the inevitable outcome of modernization and the cost that modernization must pay". With regard to the relationship of stability and reform/revolution, Huntington put forward that, "the revolution is one side of modernization, which could not happen in social forms in any time. It is a specific historical phenomena rather than a universal category." With regard to how the developing countries root out the political turbulence and decline and get real political development, Huntington stressed time and again that, "the priority is not the liberty, but to establish a legal public order. Naturally human can live with order but no liberty, but can not live with liberty but no order." So we can see that Huntington's political theory at the early stage put the order at the opposing position of the liberty and highlighted the importance of the order in maintaining developing countries' political stability, showing obvious tendency of authoritarianism. In his opinion, the real political development can only be achieved when authorities and orders are established, while the political authorities and political orders are established with systematism of politics. Therefore, he urged the third world to give the priority to build a powerful government in their political development practices so as to get the political order and maintain the stability. Thereafter, Huntington made some correction to this somewhat radical theory on political development. In his book "American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony published in 1981, he expressed a political view of certain constitutionalism, which was called the "American Creed" by him. In details, the "American Creed" mentioned in this book are the values of democracy widely accepted by American people, which reflects a strong "American-centric" complex. But anyway, Huntington has begun to address the democracy and realize the important theoretical value and practical significance of the constitutional order. However, on the questions of "what is the constitutional order" and "how to realize the constitutional order", Huntington never shared his opinions and views.
It is understandable that Huntington always takes the political order as the ultimate care of his political development theory, and he always tries to find the balance of order and democracy from developing countries' political development practices. The reason may be that, at his times, Huntington saw the developing countries deep in troubles for a moment. Especially when he saw the former Soviet Union was at vantage pro tempore in the battle for supremacy, he fell into a pessimistic mode, which decided that he held a negative view at that time on the western liberty and democracy as well as their growth conditions. However, with the times progressing and societies advancing, the social situations are changing every second, so he had to make corrections to his former views. As what he acknowledged later, the experiences of western developed countries like UK and US in realizing modernization at the early stages shall be learnt and used for reference by the upcoming nations. But, this time, he neglected the problems existing in the current western social system. When discussing about the troubles facing the developing countries, he always consciously and unconsciously evaded the international background and external causes of these problems and kept silent on the relationship of the national political turbulence with the international interferences as well as with the hegemonism. Anyway, in terms of the methodology, Huntington put forward a totally abstract interpretation of the developing countries as well as their political development activities. He argued that the political order shall be the goal, and to achieve this goal, certain political measures must be adopted. By political measures, Huntington means that the governor's effectively control over the governed so as to maintain the stable political order. So we can see that Huntington has recoganised the relationship of the authority with the stability and also the function of the stable governing order. But he had not considered the possibility of political turbulence caused by the governor's unscrupulous behaviours trampling upon the liberty. Moreover, in many circumstances, the latter is more destructive for political orders of developing countries. So we have to question Huntington's theory of political stability and order, and particularly we are confused by his conclusion that "the order should take priority over the liberty" can be proved with logical approaches and practical experiences. The author thinks, when Huntington stated the construction of political orders, the most important thing is that he neglected the positive roles the constitutional government and rule of law play in the political orders. In his description, the political order has no substantial contents and features of the constitutional order, neither the formal components. So it is hard to obtain the public trust, and its tendency of universal politicization can be partly seen.
2. Fukuyama's liberal democracy system - realistic contradiction of theory of history end.
Another western politics giant contemporary with Huntington, Mr. Fukuyama also made comments about the political orders. In summer of 1989, Fukuyama published an article titled "The End of History" on the US "National Interest", and in 1992 he published another paper titled in "The End of History and the Last Man", in which he systematically expounded his political order theory. In his opinion, the history of the development of human societies is a human universal history heading for liberal democracy. The liberal democracy system is "the end of the development of human ideological forms" and "the final ruling form of human societies" and it composes the end of history. He also pointed out that, the end of history does not mean the stagnation of history or that no more great historical affairs will happen; instead it means that "the basic principle and systems of history may no longer progress, because all major issues have been settled down."
Obviously, Fukuyama's theory of liberal democracy and the end of history is quite ridiculous. As the French scholar Derrida, from the realism point of view, sharply criticized Fukuyama's theory of the end of history as below:
the ideal of a liberal democracy that has finally realised itself as the ideal of human history: never have violence, inequality, exclusion, famine, and thus economic oppression affected as many human beings in the history of the earth and of humanity. Instead of singing the advent of the ideal of liberal democracy and of the capitalist market in the euphoria of the end of history, instead of celebrating the "end of ideologies" and the end of the great emancipatory discourses, let us never neglect this obvious macroscopic fact, made up of innumerable singular sites of suffering: no degree of progress allows one to ignore that never before, in absolute figures, have so many men, women and children been subjugated, starved or exterminated on the earth.
Such are the facts that the all the man-made disasters of Middle East Wars, the Kosovo crisis and the "9·11" terrorists incident, etc, have shown us more than once that, the current world order and the governing environment are facing unprecedented challenges and crisis. Various social realities have demonstrated to us that we have no reason to hold an over optimistic attitude towards now or the future, or we will only underestimate incidence of disasters, leading to misunderstanding of and blind to the real situation. So we can see that the liberal democracy is just a periodical outcome of the development of human societies, which the human societies will develop critically and move to a higher social target. Fukuyama's theory that liberal democracy is so-called "the end of history" is totally unsustainable, and his "end theory" is an ultra argument of "political order".
3.Justice spirit of constitutional order
Behind the above phenomena, another phenomenon that attention shall be paid to, is that in many countries, when a crisis or turbulence occurs, there is always a set of mechanism and power controlling the direction of reforming movement and in fact playing a role of order construction. Like the presidential impeachment occurred in Korea, the trial procedure and the court decision of the Korea national constitutional court undoubtedly provided a rational measure of mediation, so the social turbulence that annoyed Korea politics for a moment finally ended and the political order was maintained. Bhutan's democracy was realized under the guidance of elites. The hundreds years of hereditary monarchy announced its end through a constitutional revolution, which was of earthshaking significance under a placid surface, and the country achieved the transformation from the hereditary monarchy to the parliamentary democracy. The revolution of Nepal happened during extraordinarily drastic dissension of political power, involving huge interference of international community, fierce competition among domestic political parties and groups, as well as the great pressure from civil populace. Consequently, the revolutionary struggle completely changed the constitutional system of Nepal. However, the situation in Thailand is just opposite. During social changes, the masses, military leaders and government bureaucrats are major force playing game in the turbulent political pattern.
Throughout the reform process of all countries, political stability undoubtedly attracted wide attention. During the process of modernization construction in the third world countries, owing to the economic structure, regime and social culture system changes brought by the economic development, most of the third world countries had the aspirations to facilitate the modernization and to promote economic development, with less importance attached to the political stability. So the result always was that, the modernization brought them a momentary prosperity, but at the same time, it also threw them into problems such as regime change, social turbulence and racial conflicts etc, which in turn resulted in retard and even stagnation and recession of economy due to unsustainable momentum. The continuous political order means stable order. If political order is no longer sustained, it will give rise to political destabilization. The political development means the transition from one political order to, another. During the transition, the political destabilization is inevitable, but the level and extent of destabilization are different. In fact, there are two ways to impel the political order transitions: revolution and reformation. The historical experience tells us that, the progressive reformation brings lower level and smaller extent of political destabilization than revolution. Therefore, to maintain political stability, it needs to establish a long-lasting political order. To establish a sustained and harmonious political order shall be the ultimate target of values and ideal pursuit of political development of every country. Seen from the history and logical pattern of political development, peoples are always trying to find an ideal order. However, different groups of people have different understanding of the ideal political order construction in different times.
Authoritarian is the important guarantee of maintaining the order. As mentioned above, one of contribution of Huntington's political order theory is that, he recognized the vulnerability of political order in the countries which are trying to accomplish modernization and so he considered political stability as the basic social target just as same as the economic development to arouse people's demand for political order. However, although Fukuyama's "end of history" theory has its insurmountable defects, some of his opinions on establishing the state capacity have somewhat referential values. It can be seen that, after the Second World War, when the traditional authoritarianism was abandoned, the sediment of new authoritarianism floated up. If we take that the traditional authoritarianism is built up on the basis that the masses were not mobilized, then the new authoritarianism is built up on the basis that the society has entered into the course of modernization, and the masses have been mobilized into this courses and the modern political life—— the construction of arithmocracy with strong modernization orientation. Under this situation, people always prefer to execute the dominion in the name of constitution and law. And in the political life, there are nominal representative institutions or interests expression institutions, and so on. And that is why some scholars consider the new authoritarianism as a kind of "democratic transformation".
Nevertheless, the excessive authority is bound to hinder economic development and social progress. For example, some countries built a conservative, rigid and highly power-concentrated regime in order to maintain political stability. It may be helpful in a specific period to maintain political stability, but it hampers economic development and undermines social progress. We saw that, with the waves of globalization surging one after another, the new authoritarianism was impinged inevitably. In fact, in the academic world, it has begun to distinguish the conditions and the causes of the democratization, and the hot discussions have been arisen on the topics like relationship of the elite strategy and the democratization, like whether the democratization shall be abandoned, etc. Meanwhile, it shows a tendency of setting the authority and the democracy against each other. After the collapse of former Soviet Union, Russia immediately turned to the track of the western liberal democracy. However, what it finally built is a "real authoritarian" democracy. If we can say, Yeltsin started an era of authoritarianism of Russia, then, Putin not only carried forward the most of policies that strengthening presidential system, but also pushed forward in many cases. So compared with Yeltsin, Putin did the exactly the same thing but more so. Just as Putin publicized that, "for Russians, a powerful country is neither an alien monster, nor something to fight with, on the contrary, it is the source of order and security, also the advocate and major driving force of any reform." So the democracy in the Russia was called "controllable democracy". As a matter of fact, the democracy of Russia has more formal meaning rather than material meaning. It is thus clear that, the authoritarianism has not yet, and actually can never entirely eliminate.
The constitutional practices proved that, it is possible to realize the organic unification of the authority and the liberty in one constitutional order. Even though the modernization and the political stability seem like a sphinx enigma with binary irreconcilation, it is not truth. The experience tells us, to work out the enigma effectively, it has to formulate a widespread and thorough modern democracy system through perfect approaches of law. The early capitalistic countries creatively constructed the state power structure of the "separation of the three powers", the major political order of which is: the three powers are parallel and balancing, no one of them is superior to another. It is like a plan triangle, which is obviously more stable than "one point" form of power centralization. And the structure of "separation of the three powers" not only can avoid the malady of suppressing the democracy, with supplying the space and vitality to the democracy, but also achieve the stability of a "triangle". Regardless the scientificity, reasonability and effectiveness of applying the natural science principle to the authority distribution here, from ancient to modern times, the political stability is always one of key priorities when political theorists and practitioners talk about the authority distribution and operation. Experience tells us that, the constitutional spirit produces dynamic stability and is beneficial to maintain an unvarying order. The centuries of political stability of Britain, firstly benefited from its inherent free economic order, beyond that, it has lots of things to do with its long standing theory of the rule of law, as well as its constitutional order. And the US created the precedent of constitutional order by promulgating the codified constitution, the function of which to maintain the political stability has been corroborated by its over two hundred years of constitutional practices through "countering changes with changelessness".
The variability and the diversity of the world tell us that, in this great changing and transforming times, the authority is a necessary and sharp weapon for any powerful country, and the liberty is an indispensable and standby remedy for any healthy and orderly society. Both authority and liberty are unified in the demand and practice of constitutional order. Firstly, the constitutional order is a diverse and tolerant order. "The modern society ruled by law shall be a multivalve logic society with no exclusion and high tolerance." Britain is the motherland of constitutional government, one of most outstanding characteristics of its constitutional theory is the diverse claims and various value demand, mainly including: the formalistic constitutionalism, welfare state, procedural rule of law and neorationalism etc.; Secondly, the constitutional order is also a realistic but not conservative order. The rule of law is ideal and realistic. In another word, the constitutional ideal is actually an expression of "practice", which is the morality and development mechanism of the constitutional government. But the "practical" constitutionalism is by no means conservatism. Constitutional government is both ideal and realistic. The "realistic" decided the necessary of constitutional practice. At , last, the constitutional order also is a dynamically stable order. The constitutional practice occurred in diverse political culture and social environment, belongs to the sensu latu legal compromise and cooperation, and is the manifestation of human political civilization advancement. Sometimes, the promotion of political progress not only relies on the battles, but also on the consensus and agreement reached by making compromises and cooperation. This is almost an art of politics and the rule of law. In current changing and transforming times, "practical" constitutionalism can be perfectly interpreted and fully expressed in the rational constitutional practices.
From the functionalism point of view, among all social orders constructed past, the constitutional order is the least bad order form. Firstly, the sovereignty and the operation of state power are affirmed and regulated through constitutional approaches, so as to provide fundamental support to the state regime and to maintain the stable regime. The operation mechanism, to reasonably allocate the state power by constitutional rules, can realize the legal power transition and normative power operation, and can effectively preclude unstable factors existing in the regime, so the whole regime is sustained and orderly, and the authoritative distribution of values can be realized. In fact, no orderly society can be realized without authority. What the constitutionalists need to guard against is only those absolute authorities which have no restraint. Secondly, the constitutional government provides the political subjects with a complete set of basic constitutive rules and rules of order, to control the political struggle within the existing constitutional framework in accordance with the standardized procedures, so as to prevent the political crisis from aggravating. Actually, it plays a role of solving political conflicts and eliminating political contradictions; Also, in modern societies, when the constitutional government builds the framework of liberal politics, it also provides all necessary and imperative rights guarantee for the operation of governmental powers. It is conducive for ensuring the political subjects to orderly participate in various political activities and fully express their demands for interests, within the established institutional framework, so that the whole social regime can always be orderly and operated soundly. It can also encourage people to take every positive action to deal with various political disputes and eliminate conflicts through various positive and orderly constitutional actions; Moreover, the constitutional government can also provide a reasonable pattern for distribution of diverse political interests so as to maintain a relatively liberal social order; At last, the tolerant constitutional government can effectively prevent the society from ideological autocracy prevent the masses from following blindly, and stop the emerging of obscurant awareness, so that the societies can be held in a rational path. At the same time, the constitutional consensus will make people develop independent cognition and emotion on their respective regime, so the different ideologies can be integrated and coexisted within an institutional framework acceptable to all to maintain stability and applicability of politics. It can be seen that: in countries which carried out constitutional system at earlier stage, even though the tradition of politics and law is different, and constitutional development modes show different features, these countries generally maintained political stability and relatively orderly constitutional pattern. After the Second World War, with the publication of the "Universal Convention on Human Rights" and other international conventions of human rights, it undoubtedly marked that the constitutional consensus has been further reached among countries, which speeded up the constitutional reforms. Since then, there was no more human rights disaster like the Second World War broke out again. Even in those developing countries which are currently stepping forward totteringly along an unsmooth road of constitutional government, because of the functions of their constitutional theory and relevant systems, they also maintain a dynamic and orderly political development momentum. In a word, the constitutional government is an inevitable tendency and advanced status of the development of human political civilization, the reflection of supreme rationality of human, and the primary goal of countries which are currently carrying forward regime reform. Undoubtedly, the constitutional order is the most ideal social objective and development status for maintaining political order through measures of the rule of law.
Any reform is definitely to break the old system and establish a new one. The constitutional reform is not an exception. Firstly, the constitutional stability does not mean the absolute status of rest and rigidity, but a dynamically stable status. From the development point of view, the constitutional stability means that, the existing regimes are operated and developed under the relevant regulatory mechanisms. Therefore, the achievement of the constitutional order may cause the political fluctuations in modern countries, within certain period and certain limits. And this is bound to cause people's psychological fluctuations, within certain period and certain limits. So, the achievement of the constitutional order relies on the people's cognitive abilities and levels of constitutional government. Without people's mutual and conscious constitutional awareness, the constitutional order cannot be achieved; Secondly, though the constitutional order reflects an orderly operation of rights and power, because of the "equal-right" political relationship of internal structure of constitutional system, the activities of power characters are always idiosyncratic. If let it be, it could go to extremes. In that case, we will never achieve the constitutional goal. In addition, because it violates the constitutional principles, the human liberty will be restrained or damaged; Thirdly, the external factors which prevent the achievement of constitutional order, especially those occasional and uncontrollable ones, will directly influence the progress and the speed of constitutional order construction. From the worldwide point of view, even if constitutional movements have hundreds years of history, there are many countries only having the outer show of the constitution, but no concrete substance or foundation for constructing the constitutional order. For example, Iraq and Afghanistan currently are facing lots of problems after they copied the western constitutional mode. Russia turned to the track of western democracy after the collapse of former Soviet, but it has not realized the ideal constitutional order yet. Also, as the systematic foundation of the constitutional order, the constitution sees its own limits. For example, the norm of legislation relies too much on the principles, with too large extension margin. It gives too much uncertainty to the norm of the constitution, and in these uncertain situations, the law executors will have more options, and they may take advantages of it to weasel out on purpose. From the point of view of constitutional provisions, because these provisions are too sketchy and too abstract to bring many loopholes to law enforcement, so the law executors are prone to make arbitrary decisions, leaving the constitution there as a book. In addition, compared with the legislation norm of other laws, the design of constitutional norm of all countries are generally partial to the behavior pattern. In many cases, the implementation of the constitutional sanction has to rely on the ordinary law. That is exactly why there are few representative cases of constitutional sanction, and these cases have strong politic natures. In this way, the normalization and authority of constitution are greatly lowered; besides, the institutional identifications and provisions are generally more than the implement provisions in all countries' constitutional norms. It always makes the constitution have no provisional support for supervision and guarantee, so the constitution becomes a mere formality. And, from the point of view of objects and contents, in lots of countries' constitutions, there are few regulations to limit the actions of the governing party. In general circumstances, the management of the actions of the governing party just relies on the internal regulations and general practices of the party. But these internal regulations are neither forceful enough nor binding as the constitution and law, giving rise to loopholes between the constitution and the legal responsibilities. Therefore, "once the governing party abuses the constitutional organizations and intervention rights, the constitutional government will definitely be out of control" and so on. From this point of view, the turbulence and the crisis are inevitable during the current constitutional reform, and the prices countries have to pay to promote constitutional movements.
As far as the causes of the turbulence and crisis in the current changing societies, they show in different ways in different countries due to different starting points, driven force, and relevant external conditions. In this regard, just as Professor Li Long says, "the constitutional crisis is the outcome of internal conflicts of constitutional system. The contradictions and conflicts between the civil rights and the state power, as well as the state authorities, will pose a grave threat to the current constitutional system, or even turn into a constitutional crisis, if they are not settled timely and effectively. The negative function of the constitutional government is related to its own characteristics and also has something to do with the lack of ecological conditions for constitutional order. The former is inherent, but the latter can be improved and eliminated through certain approaches. Generally speaking, the constitutional system is closely related to the changing political and economical systems. In certain circumstances, the misplacement of the goals and measures of constitution system would result in the negative effect. For example, in countries with long history of feudal despotism or with intensive political battles, their governors always purely consider the constitutional system as the tools of class struggle or political governance, or position it as the only demand for classes ruling. If it is the case, it will surely result in the ignorance to the democracy value and lack of human rights care, and during their constitutional practices, even result in the tendencies of "anti-democracy" or "anti-humanitarianism"...and other negative effect. In addition, if the constitutional goals and values fail to accord with the state conditions, civil conditions and historical conditions, it will also cause various adverse effects, such as resulting in the tendency of constitutional government becoming "disorder" or "out of order". Therefore, in terms of the negative effects of constitutional order, we should make concrete analysis according to concrete situations. Only by finding out the deep-rooted causes, can we work out the effective and practical countermeasures. If it is the problems of systematic concepts or practical skills, we are able to finally solve them by improving and perfecting constitutional system step by step.
 Chen Yao, Democratic Transition of New Authoritarianism Regime, Shanghai People’s Publishing House, July 2006, 1st Edition, pp.29-30.
 Refer to the author’s dissertation named Constitutional Order in Changing Societies (Constitutionalism and Rule of Law specialty, Central China Normal University, adviser Tang Ming, passed oral defence June 15, 2009, to be published by the People’s Publishing House in 2010).
 ['American'] Samuel P. Huntington, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century, translated by Liu Junning, Shenghuo-Dushu-Xinzhi Joint Publishing, 1998, p.15.
 Yu Chongsheng, Political Civilization: University and Particularity, Journal of Wuhan University (Social Science Edition), 2003 (5).
 Xie Lai, New and Old Kings Lead Bhutan to Democracy, Southern People Weekly, 2008 (11).
. Wen Ya, Nepal’s Road to Republicanism, Encyclopedic Knowledge, 2008 (8).
. ['American'] Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, translated by Huang Shengqiang et al., China Social Sciences Press, 2003, preface, pp.1-3.
. Yang Changyu, Legality and Crisis of Contemporary Russian Presidential Government of Power, Seeking Truth, 2007 (6).
. Teng Biao, Human Rights: from Idea to System, Time Education (history of pioneering countries), 2008 (3).
 Tao Wenzhao, The Symposium on U.S. Year 2000 Presidential Election and American Politics and Society” Held in Beijing, 2000 (4). Wang Jue, American Presidential Election 2000, The Knowledge of English, 2000 (9). Ding Sheng, Donkey Elephant War of the Century——Prelimiary Analyais of American Presidential Election 2000, World Knowledge, 2000 (6).
 ['American'] Thomas·L·Friedman, Foreign Affairs: Medal of Honour, New York Times, Dec. 15, 2000.
 Wang Zhi, American Constitution and Its Functions, China Society Periodical, 2007 (6).
 Samuel P. Huntington, The Lonely Superpower, Foreign Affairs, March/April 1999.
 Zheng Yi: Reflection on International Protection of Human Rights from Iraq War, Law and Social Development, 2006 (10).
 Shi Ping, The Future of Iraq, Global People, “Foreign Press Briefing” Column, 2008 (15).
 Xie Lai, New and Old Kings Lead Bhutan to Democracy, Southern People Weekly, 2008 (11).
 Wen Ya, Nepal’s Road to Republicanism, Encyclopedic Knowledge, 2008 (8).
 Scene: Anti-government Demonstrators assembled outside the ASEAN Summit Venue in Thailand, reported in www. Xinhuanet.com on April 11. Red Shirt besieged city, Thailand’s Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva declared a state of emergency Apr. 11, 2009 15:06:28Source: www.chinanews.com (Beijing).
 As experts commented, “It’s been exactly decade since Asian financial crisis. Many institutions believe that Thailand has recovered from economic crisis, however, the shadow of economic crisis is still widespread.” Chen Hongsheng, Thailand: Review 2007 and Vision 2008, Around Southeast Asia, 2008 (5).
 Special as the Thailand’s politics, the political role of army is not only military instrument and political instrument, but also special social organization and interest group since constitutional monarchy as a result of a coup staged by army in 1932. The political situation in Thailand has much to do with Thai Army. Thai Army that is always independent from the regime of state controls and manipulated the political situation. In fact, large room is reserved for army in its new Constitution 2007.
 For instant, the Constitution of Thailand 2007 expressly provides that, over 20,000 Thai’s signatures can initiate a process of impeachment against prime minister and over 100,000 Thai’s signatures can initiate a constitutional amendment. In addition, the new Constitution of Thailand provides that the minimum number of Thai to initiate a motion drops to 10,000 people in order to strengthen the public’s control and restraint on the act of government.
 Ren Yixiong, Election and Democratization Process in Thailand, Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 2002 (1).
 The Article 5 of the Constitution of the Fifth Republic of France provides that, “the president of the republic shall abide by the constitution. The president shall ensure the normal operation of public authorities and continuity of state according to the arbitration of the president. The president shall act as the guarantor of state independence, territorial integrity and treaty compliance.” The Article 64 of the Constitution also provides that, “the president of the republic shall act as the guarantor of the independence of judical authority”.
 Guo Longlong, The Crisis of European Democracy, World Outlook, 2002 (10).
 Guo Longlong, The Crisis of European Democracy, World Outlook, 2002 (10).
 Chen Xin, The Constitution and the Politics: the case of the impeachment of president of Korea, Journal of Hubei University of Police, 2006 (2).
 Among them, including President Roh Moo Hyun exercised veto power against the special prosecution law after opposition parties put forward a motion to get involved in case investigation and requested the reconsideration of parliament… Later, South Korea’s parliament passed the special prosecution law submitted by three opposition parties including the Grand National Party again with absolute majority of 2/3 votes… On March 8, 2004, South Korea’s procuratorial organ released the outcome of mid-term illegal political funds investigation, indicating that Roh Moo Hyun is suspected of accepting bribes amounting to 11.3 billion won, exceeding 10 % of bribes accepted by the Grand National Party amounting to 82.3 billion won…Subsequently South Korea’s parliament passed the impeachment motion bill against President Roh Moo Hyun and after the suspense of presidential power, as stipulated in the Constitution of South Korea, impeachment motion bill passed by the parliament shall come into effect only upon the judgement of the South Korea’s Constitutional Court. The time limit of judgement shall be 180 days…Roh Moo Hyun didn’t recover presidential power until South Korea’s Constitutional Court made a judgement. It can be see that the whole process of the case is very tortuous (Chen Xin, The Constitution and the Politics: the case of the impeachment of president of Korea, Journal of Hubei University of Police, 2006 (2).)
 OranR.Young, The Politics of Force: Bargaining during Superpower Crisis，Princeton: University Press: 1968, p.15.
 ['American'] Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, translated by Li Shengping et al., Huaxia Press, 1988, p.11.
 ['American'] Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, translated by Li Shengping et al., Huaxia Press, 1988, p.41.
 ['American'] Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, translated by Li Shengping et al., Huaxia Press, 1988, p.41.
 ['American'] Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, translated by Li Shengping et al., Huaxia Press, 1988, p.259.
 ['American'] Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, translated by Li Shengping et al., Huaxia Press, 1988, p.7.
 ['American'] Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, translated by Huang Shengqiang et al., China Social Sciences Press, 2003, preface, p.3.
 ['American'] Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, translated by Huang Shengqiang et al., China Social Sciences Press, 2003, preface, p.3.
['Frenchman']Jacques Derrida, Specters of Marx, translated by He Yi, China Renmin University Press, 1999, pp.120-121.
 For example, he believed that the views such as the exertion of external force shall focus on the institutional need stimulation of recipient country and self institutional supply capacity of recipient country, can be used for reference (Francis Fukuyama, State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century, China Social Sciences Press, 2007, pp.115-116).
 As seen by scholars, “new authoritarianism refers to the ideology or regime that a few oligarchic groups centralizing political power strictly control interests expression and political participation such as the activities organized by political parties and interests groups, and the social movements by means of representative system or other state instruments, taking modernization and economic growth as its main objectives”. (Chen Yao, Democratic Transition of New Authoritarianism Regime, Shanghai People’s Publishing House, July 2006, 1st Edition, pp.29-30).
 As pointed by scholars with respect to the achievements of new authoritarian countries like Latin America in terms of national economy in 1997s, “over the past two or three decades, developing countries experienced epoch-making political and economic transition to different extent. The movement from authoritarianism to democratic governance was so extensive that it can tackle the background of serious economic crisis and market-oriented reform” ( ['American'] Stephan Haggard, Robert R.Kaufman, The Political Economy of Democratic Transitions, translated by Zhang Dajun, Social Sciences Academic Press, 2008, Introduction, p.1).
 ['Russian'] Putin, Russia at the Turn of the Millennium, The Selected Works of Putin, China Social Sciences Press, 2002, p.69.
 Lu Deshan, Research on Central State Power Structure, The Collected Works of Constitution Studies, Wuhan University Press, 1996, p.151.
 Zhang Caifeng, The Rule of Law: Diversified Views about the Rule of Law in Contemporary Britain, Journal of Chinese People''s Public Security University, 2003 (2).
 With regard to the attitude toward the politics of countries in the world and international political affairs, today’s hegemonic countries, generally considering their own strategic interests, blindly use their own political ideology, system and thinking to replace heterogeneous political culture and regime. Those countries didn’t show the least respect or recognition to the heterogeneous political culture and regime and try to solve all problems through war. Obviously, it is due to lack of political humility. (Chen Yunsheng, Judicial Humility and Its Practice in the Judicial Review in US, Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Philosophy &Social Science Edition), 2005 (5) ).
 Zhang Yiqing, On the Values of Constitutionalism, Law and Social Development, 2006 (3).
 Zhang Yiqing, On the Values of Constitutionalism, Law and Social Development, 2006 (3).
 Xu Xiuyi, Han Dayuan, Fundamental of Modern Constitution, Chinese People''s Public Security University Press, 2001, p218.
 Li Bochao, A Study on Crisis of Constitutionalism, Law Press, December 2006, 1st Edition, preface.