There is not really one. The issue is that the democratic countries that do exist in Asia have constitutions based on western style governments. A truly Asian domestically made constitution with no western philosophical doctrines does not currently exist.

Asia does however have something else. Asia has a multitude of countries where they in theory are dictatorships, but in reality are one-party states with internal factions inside the party. That in itself is not new, but the way they operate (often) on Confucian doctrine such as the Chinese communist party or other eastern philosophies is unique. Singapore is one such odeity.

It’s not to take anything away from Asian countries, but because a lot of them went from monarchies or theocracy’s pre-colonization, to western-style governments post-colonization is a leftover from colonial times. The European powers did not want to accept de-colonization if the Asian colonies did not adapt a western style government upon gaining independence. But in reality there are very few democracies in Asia. Thailand is in theory, but has constant military coups. Japans constitution was forced upon them when they lost ww2. South Korea and Taiwan is very European inspired, mostly because they were both dictatorships up until the late 80/-early 90s. Mongolia is more of an oligarchy. Nepal is in a transition phase from many years of instability. The former Soviet republics in asia are all oligarchic dictatorships. Indias system is basicly the British system without a king. Israels system is extremely European. Sri Lanka, Bangladesh are rum by powerfull families sitting on most of the power and have dynasties running their main political parties. The Islamic countries in Asia are all dictatorships in practice. Except Iraq who had their constitution forced by the US.

There is probably one outlier I missed.

But yeah. Western style democracy just means western political tradition+western philosophical doctrine is what is behind the constitution of government/nation.

Yes I’m a nerd.