新加坡國立大學 化學系

分析中華民國與中華人民共和國對「全中國」主權宣示 Part 1

4月6日 06:17
Question: Doesn't PRC and ROC both claim the entirety of China as their territory? So essentially they are two governments claiming one piece of land. I guess it makes sense that the entirety of China is one color on the map? Answer: To assess whether a region is a territory of a state, we will have to look at what the Constitution of PRC and ROC says, for it is the legal foundation of all claims. a. Constitution of the Republic of China (Taiwan) The Constitution of ROC regarding territorial claims have always been rather vague. According to Article 4 of the Constitution (中華民國領土,依其固有之疆域,非經國民大會之決議,不得變更之;國民大會職務已於 2004 年憲法第七次增修完全移除), the territorial claim of the Republic of China is not specifically stated. There is another point to note, however, that the role of 國民大會 has been removed since the 7th Amendment of the Constitution, with its role over territorial claims now being taken over entirely by the Legislative Yuan (立法院) and the citizens of the “the Free Area of ROC (which is limited to the territory of Taiwan Island, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu and other minor islands)”. Hence, while the Constitution does not specifically define the territory of ROC, the Amendment of the Constitution has limited the decision of such important matter to only the citizens of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. So, what do the above say about the claim over the entirety of China? Nothing. b. Constitution of the People’s Republic of China From the Constitution of PRC, I am able to find no specific article stating the claim of the entirety of ‘China’ as part of its territory. In short, there is no article that defines how large ‘China’ should be. Interestingly, however, the PRC Constitution does specifically and oddly state its claim over Taiwan (台灣是中華人民共和國的神聖領土的一部分。完成統一祖國的大業是包括台灣同胞在內的全中國人民的神聖職責), an article in the Constitution that was – again interestingly – only added since 1982. So, what do these two sets of Constitution say about claiming the whole of so-called ‘China’ as its territory? Nothing.
愛心
8
.回應 9
共 9 則回應
國立成功大學
可是自己身為臺灣人實在沒有那個野心去把整片秋海棠視為自己的領土欸⋯我只希望能夠在臺灣這個美麗的島嶼過著民主自由的生活 反而是隔壁的永遠只想著要怎麼併吞臺灣(?
國立屏東大學
如果有中文版就好了⋯
原PO - 新加坡國立大學 化學系
B1 我也沒,哈哈,文章裡頭已經就客觀部分陳述了
南加州大學 商學院
超多人沒讀憲法就在吱吱叫 這篇觀念正確
其實我在想憲法出現之前的憲草能不能算進去 1936的五五憲草有出現過固有之疆域 可是到1946的國共內戰版本的憲草就沒寫 在這篇的最後一樓
文章,寫得過於簡單,導致毫無意義⋯⋯
原PO - 新加坡國立大學 化學系
B6 我還沒寫國際法的部分,問我這問題的那位中國朋友也不懂。 而且我不想在主觀意識上,論述太多,那已經是價值評論。我只需要把客觀的現實攤出來給對方。
B7 喔喔,原來是朋友交談的部分 你不說,我怎麼知道⋯ 還以為,你擷取報章雜誌一段話
南臺科技大學
精闢分析
馬上回應搶第 10 樓...