Hacker News Reader

Comment by pas | Hacker News Reader

Maybe the PRC's constitution does the same, but there are always exceptions, for example for national security.

The point is it doesn't matter what is on paper, it's enforcement that matters. China can write whatever it wants, but it's actions that count. They are implementing a social credit system and actively censoring all communication platforms, who cares what their constitution says?

It clearly doesn't matter what is written down. To go back to the original quote:

> There are no clear laws, only interpretations of the law based on the Party’s interests. China is not a nation under the rule of law. China is a nation under the rule of the Party.

In reality national security is interpreted and enforced in such way that all free speech is a threat.

Not defending China's level of freedom here, but our system in the West is increasingly moving in that direction. Our governments increasingly interpret national security and public safety unreasonably broadly to curtail basic freedoms

No, it is not, at least if by West you mean to include the United States. There has never been a point in US history where we have been more free to say anything and everything.

Certainly there have been cases in the West where free speech are curtailed due to concern or anxiety over national security. But while you guys are traveling north from Hawaii , we are already in the Arctic.

Any garauntee in the constitution is meaningless since the judiciary in China is not allowed to use it as a way to invalidate law. The party itself gets to decide whether they are following the constitution or not, imagine if Trump could make his executive orders without worrying about federal judges throwing them out.

Heck even the party has had issues with the judiciary at lower levels (things that didn't involve the party) where they found judges with limited education making strange decisions based on flawed logic, and of course low level corruption.

While I'm sure they don't have any intention of making the judiciary independent, there were signs that even party members were a bit dismayed by some of the decisions if only because they were worried about public perception. I belive they talked about launching some educational efforts.

Judges aren’t really that prestigious in China because they are dwarfed in power and influence by officials, so as a result it doesn’t attract the best people.

Yeah that is the impression I got too. Just another job to get if you're connected, but not really a good one.

The result is a bit predictable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com