Recent decades have witnessed the emergence of regional constitutionalism, such as North American constitutionalism or Global South constitutionalism. Instead of arguing whether there is a model of East Asian constitutionalism, this article takes a more modest stance, suggesting that a dialogic model of judicial review may be one common ground despite the diversity of constitutionalism in East Asia. Although the current literature on dialogic judicial review has concentrated primarily on common law jurisdictions in the West, the application is by no means so limited. Dialogic judicial review not only straddles the common law/civil law divide but also bridges the gap between the West and the East. In fact, the political environment in East Asia has provided fertile soil for the growth of dialogic judicial review for two interrelated reasons: the persistence of authoritarian regimes and the rampant political attack against the judiciary, even in democracies.
Transitional justice in Taiwan is criticized for being too late, slow and timid by some, and too disruptive, vengeful and polarizing by others. The politicization and polarization of transitional justice are of particular concern to many students of Taiwan politics. Rather than resulting from direct negotiations and mutual agreements between the elites from the two political camps, the political compromise Taiwan has over transitional justice only gradually reveals its dynamic state over time. The case of Taiwan, in other words,
exemplifies a long-term, incremental, an intermittent attempt to improve on a compromised state of
bounded transitional justice through the rough and tumble of partisan competition. This approach of
majoritarian muddling through is not just a more feasible second-best, but also holds the potential to
outperform other less majoritarian and more conciliatory alternatives in dealing with the lingering past of
authoritarianism in Taiwan.
The rise of Asia has had tremendous impacts on the rise and fall of regional
geopolitical powers in the region and in the globe as well. Three angles are presented to analyze Asia: tradition and transpalnt, transition and institution, and globalization and competition. Special attention is paid to the formation of regional constituional dialogue among Constituions, state governments, courts, civil societies, and other public and private entities in the region.
This study is aimed at investigating the analytical framework and theoretical
undertakings of regional constitutionalism as applied in Asia. It is directed to a
contextual analysis of Asian constitutional jurisdictions, aiming at forming a model of
typology reflecting the dynamics of contemporary Asian constitutional development.
The last focus is placed on the context of (dis)integration in the region and ints
corresponding constituitonal undertaking, forming the features and arguing for the
nature of Asian constitutionalism.