FCM Constitutional & Legal Opinions
The Free China Movement publishes reasoned constitutional and legal opinions on disputes of paramount importance to human rights, public concern and future constitutional government in Mainland China.
These are independent, non-binding FCM legal opinions. They are not judgments of an existing court, and FCM does not presently claim judicial jurisdiction.
Method
- Identify the precise questions presented.
- Establish facts, disputed facts and facts not established.
- Identify the version of ROC law applicable at the relevant date.
- Examine relevant jurisprudence of the Republic of China in Taiwan.
- Use international and comparative law where legally necessary or analytically useful.
- Present the strongest material arguments on competing sides.
- Disclose material conflicts and apply recusal safeguards.
- Permit concurrence, dissent and a conclusion that the record is insufficient.
- Preserve sources, corrections, versions and supersession history.
Authority and precedent
The Constitution of the Republic of China and controlling law take priority. Prior FCM opinions are persuasive research only and cannot override controlling law. Historical-law conclusions, later Republic of China in Taiwan jurisprudence, and future Third Republic recommendations are presented separately.
Future judicial review
The archive is intentionally maintained so a future lawfully constituted court can reconstruct the record and independently review the analysis. Future legal effect, if any, can arise only through lawful future constitutional and judicial procedures—not from FCM publication itself.
Free China 