日本在二次世界大戰之後，才仿效美國之制在其憲法中制定了美國式的違憲審查制度。而我國自民國35年立憲開始即以「司法院大法官」作為我國釋憲機關而行之有年。為此，爰以「我國與日本違憲審查制度之比較」為題，先就違憲審查制度之起源、發展和類型作一介紹，其次分就我國與日本之立憲經過及違憲審查制度之運作情形加以描述，再就兩國違憲審查權之行使機關、審查方式、權利行使之消極或積極分項加以比較，以求對照。最後以日本違憲審查權之行使因採極端的消極主義，以致於其學界及各方之批評聲浪不斷；而我國之司法院大法官卻積極地從事釋憲工作，且對於我國憲政發展及憲法進步影響甚鉅而成就斐然，以為結論。

Japan after World War II, the United States was prepared to follow her constitutional review in its Constitution. Republic of China (Taiwan) since 1946 the beginning of the constitutional order that is ＂Grand Justices＂ as a constitutional interpretation authority for years. So, ＂The Comparison of Constitutional Review in ROC(Taiwan) and Japan＂ in the title, the first to make a presentation on the origin,development and type of the system of constitutional review, followed by points on the system of the operation and situation to description, and then on the two countries to exercise the right of authority, to review the form, negative or active exercise of comparison. Finally, Japan's constitutional review exercise due to the extreme negativism that criticism of its academics and other parties of noise constantly; but our country of Grand Justices was actively engaged in the work of constitutional interpretation and constitutional development for our country and constitutional progress the impact is very huge and remarkable achievements, that conclusion.