会 议 提 案

一、案由

中国人民政治协商会议（政协）设立之初，其核心宗旨在于将各党派、各界别、各民族、各团体的代表纳入政治协商框架，实现“长期共存、互相监督、肝胆相照、荣辱与共”的政治协商原则。然而，当前政协的实际运作已严重偏离这一初衷，真正的反对派政党和持不同政见者被全面排斥在外，政治协商名存实亡。本提案旨在呼吁恢复政协作为政治协商机构的正常功能，切实落实《中国人民政治协商会议章程》的相关规定，向包括反对派政党、异议人士在内的各界人士开放政协席位，使政治协商制度回归真实、多元、包容的本来面目。

二、历史依据与现实背景

（一）政协的历史初衷。1949 年第一届中国人民政治协商会议召开时，共有各党派、各界别、各团体代表共 662 人出席，其中包括中国国民党革命委员会、中国民主同盟、中国民主建国会、中国致公党、九三学社、台湾民主自治同盟等多个党派和无党派民主人士。这一制度的设计初衷，是在新中国建立之初统一各方力量、共商国是。彼时的政协具有实质性的政治协商功能，各方可以自由发表不同意见。

（二）1957 年后的转折。反右运动后，政协的政治协商功能逐渐弱化。民主党派中大量敢于直言的人士被打成“右派”，从此以后，政协逐渐从政治协商机构异化为形式上的“统一战线组织”，反对意见被视为禁区，真正的政治协商名存实亡。

（三）当前政协的结构性缺陷。现今政协的委员构成中，各“民主党派”均自认“接受中国共产党领导”，不存在任何真正意义上的反对派或独立声音。异议人士、独立知识分子、民间组织代表、不同政治观点持有者均无法进入政协平台。这使得政协失去了其作为“政治协商”机构的核心意义。

三、提案内容与具体建议

基于上述历史依据与现实分析，本党郑重提出以下建议：

1. 开放政协席位给真正的反对派政党。允许包括中国民主党在内的未注册政党及独立政治团体派出代表参与政协会议，使政协席位真正体现“各党派”的多元性。

2. 邀请异议人士、独立知识分子参加政协。为长期关注公共事务、人权事业、法治建设的独立人士提供政协委员席位，包括但不限于维权律师、公共知识分子、独立媒体人、民间社会组织代表等。

3. 保障政协委员的言论自由与谏正质询权。任何政协委员在政协会议期间的发言、提案、质询不得作为政治追诉的依据，确立政协委员谏正免责权。

4. 建立政协提案的强制回复机制。政府部门对政协委员的提案必须在规定时限内作出书面回复，并向社会公开，接受全体政协委员的质询和监督。

5. 改革政协委员选拔机制。政协委员应通过其所代表界别的民主协商或选举产生，而非单纯由上级指定，以增强政协委员的代表性和合法性。

6. 公开政协会议过程。政协全体会议、小组讨论及提案审议应向媒体和公众开放，实现政治协商的透明化，接受全社会的监督。

四、提案理由

（一）实现《宪法》赋予公民的政治权利。《中华人民共和国宪法》第三十五条规定，公民有言论、出版、集会、结社、游行、示威的自由。将持不同政见者排斥在政治协商体制之外，违背了宪法精神。

（二）增强国家治理的合法性与有效性。当所有政治参与者均持相同立场时，政治协商失去意义。引入真正的反对派和不同声音，能形成有效的政策辩论和监督，提升决策质量，增强国家治理的合法性。

（三）回应社会多元化的现实需求。当今中国社会已高度多元化，不同的利益群体、价值观念、政治诉求广泛存在。政协作为“最广泛的爱国统一战线组织”，应当真正容纳和反映这种多元性，而非将其压制和消弭。

（四）展现制度自信。一个真正自信的政治制度，不应害怕不同声音，而应当通过包容和对话来展现其优越性。开放政协平台给反对派，正是制度自信的体现。

五、结语

政治协商的前提是多元与包容。没有反对派的参与，政治协商便无从谈起。中国民主党作为一个追求宪政民主的政党，愿意在政协的框架内，以和平、理性、建设性的方式参与国家治理，为中国的政治文明进步贡献力量。

我们期望政协能够回归其历史使命，成为真正的多党派政治协商平台，而非形式主义的橡皮图章。这不仅是对政协创立者的告慰，更是对十四亿中国人民政治权利的尊重。

提案人：中国民主党：朱虞夫、郑存柱2026 年3 月4 日

Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference

Conference Proposal

I. Rationale

When the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) was first established, its core purpose was to incorporate representatives from various political parties, sectors of society, ethnic groups, and organizations into the framework of political consultation, thereby realizing the principles of “long-term coexistence, mutual supervision, frank and open communication, and sharing both honor and disgrace.” However, the CPPCC’s current operations have severely deviated from this original intent. Genuine opposition parties and dissidents have been completely excluded, rendering the political consultation system a mere formality. This proposal aims to call for the restoration of the CPPCC’s normal functions as a political consultation body, to effectively implement the relevant provisions of the Charter of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, and to open CPPCC seats to representatives from all sectors of society—including opposition parties and dissidents—so that the political consultation system may return to its true, diverse, and inclusive nature.

II. Historical Basis and Current Context

(1) The Original Intent of the CPPCC. When the First Session of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference was convened in 1949, a total of 662 representatives from various political parties, sectors, and organizations attended, including members of the Revolutionary Committee of the Kuomintang, the China Democratic League, the China Association for Promoting Democracy, the China Zhi Gong Party, the Jiusan Society, the Taiwan Democratic Autonomous League, and other political parties, as well as non-partisan democratic figures. The original design of this system was to unify all forces and jointly deliberate on state affairs at the dawn of the People’s Republic of China. At that time, the CPPCC possessed substantive political consultation functions, and all parties could freely express differing opinions.

(2) The Turning Point After 1957. Following the Anti-Rightist Campaign, the CPPCC’s political consultative function gradually weakened. A large number of outspoken figures within the democratic parties were labeled as “rightists.” From then on, the CPPCC gradually transformed from a political consultative body into a nominal “united front organization.” Dissenting opinions were treated as off-limits, and genuine political consultation became a mere formality.

(3) Structural Deficiencies of the Current CPPCC. In the current composition of CPPCC members, all “democratic parties” acknowledge that they “accept the leadership of the Communist Party of China,” and there are no opposition parties or independent voices in any meaningful sense. Dissenters, independent intellectuals, representatives of civil society organizations, and those holding differing political views are unable to gain access to the CPPCC platform. This has caused the CPPCC to lose its core significance as an institution for “political consultation.”

III. Proposal Content and Specific Recommendations

Based on the historical context and current analysis outlined above, our Party solemnly proposes the following recommendations:

1. Open CPPCC seats to genuine opposition parties. Allow unregistered political parties, including the China Democratic Party, and independent political groups to send representatives to participate in CPPCC sessions, ensuring that CPPCC seats truly reflect the diversity of “all political parties.”

2. Invite dissidents and independent intellectuals to participate in the CPPCC. Provide CPPCC member seats to independent individuals who have long been concerned with public affairs, human rights, and the rule of law, including but not limited to rights defense lawyers, public intellectuals, independent media professionals, and representatives of civil society organizations.

3. Guarantee CPPCC members’ freedom of speech and their right to offer advice and raise inquiries. No remarks, proposals, or inquiries made by any CPPCC member during CPPCC sessions shall be used as grounds for political prosecution; establish immunity for CPPCC members regarding their right to offer advice and criticism.

4. Establish a mandatory response mechanism for CPPCC proposals. Government departments must provide written responses to CPPCC members’ proposals within the prescribed timeframe, make these responses public, and be subject to inquiry and oversight by all CPPCC members.

5. Reform the selection mechanism for CPPCC members. CPPCC members should be selected through democratic consultation or election within the sectors they represent, rather than simply being appointed by higher authorities, to enhance their representativeness and legitimacy.

6. Make the proceedings of CPPCC meetings public. Plenary sessions, group discussions, and proposal deliberations of the CPPCC should be open to the media and the public to ensure the transparency of political consultation and to accept oversight from society as a whole.

IV. Rationale for the Proposal

(1) Realizing the political rights granted to citizens by the Constitution. Article 35 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China stipulates that citizens have the freedom of speech, publication, assembly, association, procession, and demonstration. Excluding dissidents from the political consultation system runs counter to the spirit of the Constitution.

(2) Enhancing the Legitimacy and Effectiveness of National Governance. When all political participants hold identical positions, political consultation loses its meaning. Introducing genuine opposition and dissenting voices can foster effective policy debate and oversight, improve the quality of decision-making, and strengthen the legitimacy of national governance.

(3) Responding to the Real-World Demands of a Diverse Society. Contemporary Chinese society is highly diverse, with a wide range of interest groups, value systems, and political demands. As the “broadest patriotic united front organization,” the CPPCC should genuinely accommodate and reflect this diversity, rather than suppressing or eliminating it.

(4) Demonstrating institutional confidence. A truly confident political system should not fear dissenting voices but should demonstrate its superiority through inclusiveness and dialogue. Opening the CPPCC platform to the opposition is precisely a manifestation of such institutional confidence.

V. Conclusion

The prerequisites for political consultation are pluralism and inclusiveness. Without the participation of the opposition, political consultation is impossible. As a political party committed to constitutional democracy, the China Democratic Party is willing to participate in national governance within the framework of the CPPCC in a peaceful, rational, and constructive manner, contributing to the advancement of China’s political civilization.

We hope that the CPPCC will return to its historical mission and become a genuine multi-party political consultation platform, rather than a rubber-stamp body mired in formalism. This would not only honor the memory of the CPPCC’s founders but also demonstrate respect for the political rights of China’s 1.4 billion people.

Proposers: China Democratic Party: Zhu Yufu, Zheng Cunzhu

March 4, 2026