Constitution, Law & Justice: Section Hub · Research & Archives · Research Methodology · Sources & Attribution
Jurisdiction & authority rule: ROC (Taiwan) constitutional law, PRC law applicable in mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao law, historical ROC law and international/comparative authorities are identified separately. A legal source is not treated as directly governing another jurisdiction merely because it is relevant by analogy or historical continuity.
This section develops Free China Movement constitutional and legal research concerning constitutional continuity, rights, judicial doctrine, legal transition, historical cases, and future rule-of-law institutions affecting Mainland China.
Institutional status
FCM does not presently exercise judicial jurisdiction. Materials in this section are independent, non-binding constitutional and legal research. They are not judgments of an existing court and do not presently bind any person, government or institution.
Constitutional and legal programs
- FCM Constitutional & Legal Opinions — reasoned, non-binding opinions and first-impression research.
- Historical Case Review — 1949–2025 — historical legal cases and jurisprudential backfill.
- 2026 — Ten Cases of Paramount Importance — current annual legal-opinion docket.
- Table of Authorities & Precedents — authority hierarchy and precedent controls.
- Judicial Engagement & Jurisdiction — present jurisdiction limits and future lawful review.
- Methodology, Independence & Future Judicial Review — research, adversarial-review and future-court safeguards.
Research branches in development
- Foundational Constitutional Questions — Articles I–VI.
- Constitutional Status & Effective Control.
- Mainland Constitutional Rights & Representation.
- Civil Continuity & Private Rights.
- Public Acts, Repression & Transitional Review.
- ROC Judicial Engagement with Mainland China.
- International & Comparative Jurisprudence.
- Mainland Legislative Continuity & Catch-Up.
Authority and review discipline
The project begins with the Constitution of the Republic of China, then determines the applicable constitutional amendments, statutes and regulations, authoritative jurisprudence of the Republic of China in Taiwan, historical ROC authorities, applicable international law, and comparative jurisprudence where useful. Later provisions are not assumed to govern a Mainland question merely because they are later in time; territorial, personal and subject-matter scope must be demonstrated.
Historical law applicable at the time of an event, later jurisprudence of the Republic of China in Taiwan, and recommendations for a future democratic constitutional order are kept distinct rather than silently merged.
Designed for independent future review
FCM preserves sources, applicable-law dates, disputed facts, contrary arguments, conflicts and recusals, corrections and version history so that any lawfully constituted future democratic judiciary can independently examine the work. No FCM opinion acquires legal effect automatically. A future court must remain free to affirm, modify, distinguish, reject, remand, overrule or give no weight to an FCM analysis under the law then in force.
See also: Free China Movement (FCM) Policy Papers & Governing Alternatives