in each case with regional variations on categories found elsewhere. In economic
terms, a few Asian states are extremely prosperous, a few are extremely poor, but
most are developing economically, with evident success.
The very diversity of Asia might be regarded as a distinguishing characteristic for
the purposes of comparison between regions. To quote Black and Bell, Asia offers a
‘laboratory of operative comparative law’.^113 There are shared regional experiences,
moreover, which underpin broadly shared approaches to constitutionalism, at the
highest level of generality. Both the Second World War and its aftermath took a
distinctive form in Asia, forcing decolonisation, leading in many cases to a period of
authoritarianism, which in turn has evolved progressively into more democratic
forms of government. Western conceptions of the state, of law and of the legal and
symbolic functions of written constitutions have been superimposed on existing
approaches to law and government throughout Asia. In some cases the veneer is
thin but in most it is thickening, encouraging the conception of ‘transitional’
constitutionalism
114
and sometimes employing experimental forms.
115
As Yeh and
Chang note, in much of Asia there was no constitutional founding moment.
Rather, constitutions were part of a story of modernisation, providing an umbrella
for democratisation rather than, necessarily, a catalyst for it.
116
In Asia, of all places, it is risky to purport to identify shared characteristics of
constitutionalism itself. An attempt to do so in the 1990 s that linked ‘Asian Values’
with the justification of authoritarian regimes discredited the concept and may also,
ironically, have enhanced the attraction of universalism. Nevertheless, with due
caution, it is possible to identify some differences of emphasis in the constitutional
arrangements of most Asian states, in contrast with most of those elsewhere in the
world. Thus, by and large, Asian constitutionalism responds to societies that are less
inclined to individualism than their Western counterparts and more inclined to
value consensus; is more receptive to the constitutionalisation of social rights; and
relies less on judicial review as a creative constitutional force. These features are
not static, however, and there are notable exceptions to them.^117
(^113) Ann Black and Gary F. Bell, ‘Introduction’, in Ann Black and Gary F. Bell (eds.),Law and
Legal Institutions of Asia: Traditions, Adaptations and Innovations(Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press, 2011 ), p. 22.
(^114) Yeh and Chang, ‘The changing landscapes of modern constitutionalism’.
(^115) Examples abound in the chapters in this volume: the innovations to the electoral system to
accommodate minority representation in Singapore, the deliberate departures from British
constitutional traditions to accommodate diversity and pluralism in India, the distinctive
co-existence of two very different legal systems in Hong Kong, and the developing notion of
the socialist rule of law in Vietnam.
(^116) Jiann-Rong Yeh and Wen-Chen Chang, ‘The emergence of East Asian constitutionalism:
features in comparison’ ( 2011 ) 59 American Journal of Comparative Law 805 at 816 – 20 ,
writing about Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Bui Ngoc Son’s chapter in this volume
(Chapter 9 ) also explores this theme in relation to constitutional change in Vietnam.
(^117) These include the scope of matters subject to judicial review by the constitutional courts of
India, Indonesia and Korea, as described in this volume.