Legal experts have suggested Chinese courts should apply the constitution to settle civil rights disputes.
The legal debate began after the Supreme People's Court made a landmark judgment on August 17 that two Shandong teenagers' civil rights, as guaranteed by the constitution, had been violated and that they should be given compensation through civil claims.
The teenagers said they were deprived of an education after two other young men 'stole' their names to sit university entry examinations. The pair passed the tests and entered universities under the teenagers' names.
The teenagers went to the Shandong court to sue the two young men and education authorities for infringing their rights. The court sought instruction from the Supreme People's Court, which ruled the teenagers' education rights, as guaranteed by the constitution, were violated.
Legal experts called the ruling a breakthrough, saying Chinese courts had shied away from applying the constitution in judgments since another Supreme People's Court ruling in 1955.
In that year, a Xinjiang court sought instruction from the People's Supreme Court on a criminal case. The Supreme People's court ruled the lower court should apply criminal laws, but not constitutional clauses, to decide verdicts and punishments in criminal cases.
Unlike the US system, in which the Supreme Court has the power to interpret the constitution, the Chinese system stipulates only the National People's Congress, the country's highest legislature, has the power of final interpretation of the constitution.