Posts

Posted on

Articles from the Finnish-Chinese Colloquium on Criminal Law now available online!

Articles from the Symposium on Finnish and Chinese Criminal Law in Comparative Perspective (Finnish-Chinese Colloquium on Criminal Law) published by Peking University Law Journal are now available online!

In August 2016, the University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law hosted the First Finnish-Chinese Colloquium on Criminal Law on through the PKU-Helsinki Law Connection, a partnership between Peking University Law School and University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law.

The topics presented at the Colloquium were compiled into research papers, which the Peking University Law Journal has now published. You can view the available articles by following the links below:

Speakers at the First Finnish-Chinese Colloquium on Criminal Law in August 2016.

The Second Colloquium on Finnish and Chinese Criminal Law is expected to be held in late August 2018.

Posted on

Prof. Liu Zuoxiang holds a lecture on “The Relationship between Party Regulations and National Law” at the Center

Professor Liu Zuoxiang, Director of the Institute of Rule of Law and Human Rights at Shanghai Normal University, College of Philosophy, Law and Political Science, held a lecture titled “The Relationship between Party Regulations and National Law” at the China Law Center on May 30, 2017. After Prof. Liu’s lecture, Zhang Kangle, doctoral researcher at the University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law and research fellow at Erik Castrén Institute of International Law and Human Rights, commented on Prof. Liu’s research.

Zhang Kangle (left), Prof. Liu Zuoxiang, Ulla Liukkunen, Director of the Center, and Kimmo Nuotio, Dean of the UH Faculty of Law (right) after the lecture. Prof. Liu presented his latest publication and donated the book, together with his other works, to the Center’s library.

Currently, there is an ongoing academic debate in China on whether or party regulations applied to the members of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) may be considered national laws. Some scholars have argued that party regulations are in effect national laws. In his presentation, Prof. Liu demonstrated how party regulations and national laws are distinct from one another.

In a country run by the rule of law, the political party is not a legislative body – national laws must be based on the Constitution. The regulations or “norms” assumed by the party for its members cannot therefore be regarded as binding laws on the whole population. The role of the party is to ensure that its ideals, beliefs and aims are realized, enabled through self-discipline and strict administration of its members. Party rules are therefore applied only to party members in order to restrict their behaviour and ensure the members’ commitment to party ideals. The national law, on the other hand, is the basis of conduct for all citizens and embodies the will of the country, and therefore cannot be as strict and ideals-based as the rules for party members.

Yet, party rules can also be made into laws through a legislative process. Indeed, much of the regulations of the CCP have actually become national law, which may be the source of confusion between the two. Since the reform and opening up policy in the late 1970s, the CCP has been the main organ to pass laws. However, all laws passed by the party must first go through the National People’s Congress. Such power dynamics demonstrates that while being the organ to exercise state power, the party is still constrained by the Constitution, the will of the people and the rule of law.

Even though there are clear distinctions between party regulations and national law, there is still much confusion around the topic. One solution, proposed by a government official, is to apply a model of two governance systems, one for the party and another for the country. The two-system solution would clarify the application of party regulations and national laws and improve the party’s capacity to govern the country. Yet, challenges considering such an approach have arisen – for instance, whether party regulations should be applied over national law or vice versa, or whether or not the violation of party regulations, if not considered as legal code, should be punishable by law.

The distinction of party regulations and national law is a very timely topic, and Prof. Liu’s attempt to shed light on the ongoing debate in China was fascinating indeed. The development of the relationship between party regulations and national law will be interesting to follow, and is an issue that China watchers, researchers and those interested in the rule of law development in China should keep an eye on.

Author: Cristina D. Juola

Posted on

Book donation by Prof. Shen Wei: Shadow Banking in China

Prof. Shen Wei, Dean and Professor of Law at Shandong University Law School, donated his latest book, Shadow Baking in China: Risk, Regulation and Policy (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016), to the Center’s Library during his visit to the Center. He also gave a lecture on arbitral awards enforcement in China during his stay (read the summary of the lecture here).

Shadow Baking in China: Risk, Regulation and Policy by Prof. Shen is a timely publication. China’s shadow banking sector is about one third the size of China’s bank-lending market, and its continuing growth presents a challenge to both domestic and global financial stability in the long term. In his book, Prof. Shen defines the concept of shadow-banking, breaks it down into sub-sectors, and discusses the development of each, including wealth management products, peer-to-peer lending, local government financing vehicles, and underground lending. The book examines the driving market forces behind the sector’s growth, exploring the risk-taking dynamics, economic incentives and behavioural aspects. Prof. Shen also presents the formal state frameworks, including central and monetary policy and the supporting structures, and discusses the role, opportunities and regulation of shadow banking in the overall economy.

Prof. Shen’s book Shadow Baking in China: Risk, Regulation and Policy is now available at the China Law Center’s Library.

Prof. Shen Wei with Kimmo Nuotio, Dean of the UH Faculty of Law and Chair of the China Law Center Board.

Prof. Shen Wei, Dean and Professor of Law at Shandong University Law School and KoGuan Chair Professor of Law at Shanghai Jiao Tong University Law School, and Global Professor of Law at New York University Law School. Prof. Shen has a career as a long-time law practitioner, focusing on FDI, private equity and M&As. He has studied abroad and holds multiple Master’s degrees in law and a PhD from London School of Economics. He has published over 130 articles in English and Chinese and is the author of multiple books in his field. Prof. Shen is an arbitrator with Hong Kong International Arbitration Commission, Shanghai International Arbitration Centre, Shanghai Arbitration Commission, Shenzhen International Court of Arbitration, and is a member of the Moody’s China Academic Advisory panel as well as the Financial Markets Law Committee’s G20 Steering Group.

Posted on

New books at the Center’s Library!

The Center has recently received multiple book donations from the CASS delegation as well as individual authors who have paid a visit to the Center. The books include titles on various topics in the judicial sphere, including IP, employment, arbitration, rule of law theory, criminal law, death penalty and history of Chinese legal philosophy.

The books have been taken to the Center’s Library for registration and will be available for consultation shortly. You can browse all the available books online at or pay a visit to the Library!

Posted on

Prof. Shen Wei, Dean of the Shangdong University Law School, visits the China Law Center

Director Ulla Liukkunen with Prof. Shen Wei.

The China Law Center hosted Prof. Shen Wei, Dean of Shangdong University Law School, during his visit to Finland. During his stay, Prof. Shen met with the Dean of the Helsinki University Faculty of Law, Kimmo Nuotio, and the director of the China Law School, Ulla Liukkunen to discuss collaboration opportunities between Shangdong University Law School and University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law. He also presented his research paper titled “Entanglement between Judicial Centralization and Local Protectionism in China: the Case of Arbitral Awards Enforcement” at the Center.

Student dormitories at the new Qingdao campus.

Shangdong University Law School, ranked 13th of over 700 law schools in China, will open its new campus in autumn 2017 in Qingdao, a small half-island between Beijing and Shanghai. Qingdao is a student-friendly area, famous for its long beaches, good beer, beautiful scenery and historical sights. The new campus, alongside the seashore of Aoshan Bay and the coastal highway, is a modern mix of Chinese and western building styles, with incorporated elements from the German colonial architecture in Qingdao. In addition to brand-new university buildings, student dormitories and convenient public transport connections right outside the university area, the campus will operate its own arts museum and a beautiful sports complex.

Qingdao campus arts museum.

 

Prof. Shen is looking forward to start as the Dean of the Law School at the new location, and believes the opening of the new campus at Qingdao presents a good opportunity for new cooperation initiatives. Until now, cooperation between the Shangdong University Law School, the University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law and the China Law Center has been built on lecture exchanges and participation in each other’s research seminars. At his visit to the Center, Prof. Shen discussed the continuation of such cooperation with Director Liukkunen, and introduced ideas for new forms of cooperation. During his meeting with Dean Nuotio, the two deans discussed further possibilities of student exchanges between the two universities.

Qingdao campus sports complex.

In an interview with the China Law Center, Prof. Shen shed light on the reasoning behind his wish to see Chinese students in Finland. “If you look outside,” Prof. Shen says, pointing to the beautiful view in the city centre of Helsinki, “it is very impressive. If Chinese students could be here for one semester and get exposed to a different legal culture, and different culture in general, they would benefit them in terms of shaping their vision for their future career and development.” The legal system in Nordic countries has raised interest in China for its emphasis on human rights protection, which is quite different from the Chinese legal culture that focuses more on collective action and collective interest. “It will be very interesting for our students to have exposure in Nordic countries. It will be good for them to spend a semester here, especially since human rights protection is one of the areas of expertise our faculty as well.”

Prof. Shen himself is an expert of business law, yet he views human rights protection as an all-encompassing topic in the field of law. “Not only human rights law is relevant to rights protection. Property rights protection, commercial rights protection, even enforcement of arbitral awards – all is relevant to rights protection.” The paper he will present at the Center is on enforcement of arbitral awards in China. “Investors who come to do business in China don’t expect the legal competence, transparency and functionality from Chinese courts that they do from courts in other countries. They prefer to resolve disputes with local parties through arbitration instead of relying on the court system.” Through arbitration, foreign parties are likely to get a favourable outcome. However, as local parties lack the willingness to enforce the arbitration awards voluntarily, foreign parties still need to rely on Chinese courts for enforcement. “In the end, foreign parties still rely on Chinese courts for human rights protection. So even though we are discussing commercial arbitration and enforcement of arbitral awards, the substantial issue is still about rights protection.”

Prof. Shen is a long-time expert in his field. He has over 10 years of experience as a law practitioner and has published widely on legal topics, including financial regulation, corporate governance, international investment law and commercial arbitration. He has held multiple professorships in various universities, including ones based in Shangdong and Hong Kong in China, as well as in Singapore and New York, and currently works as the Dean of the Shangdong University Law School. Even after the shift to academia, Prof. Shen’s experiences in Hong Kong’s law firms have left their mark, and continue to influence his vision for the future. “The most memorable thing in the private sector law firms was professionalism. People act and behave professionally, which is exactly what we are trying to teach our students.”

 

Author: Cristina D. Juola

Photos of the campus: Shangdong University Law School pamphlet.

Posted on

Professor Shen Wei holds a lecture on Arbitral Awards Enforcement in China

Dean, Professor Shen Wei from Shandong University Law School held a lecture titled “Entanglement between Judicial Centralization and Local Protectionism in China: the Case of Arbitral Awards Enforcement” at the Finnish China Law Center on May 23, 2017. During his presentation, Prof. Shen presented empirical data on the internal reporting system in Chinese courts, and whether the system has been effective at tackling local protectionism and discrimination against foreign parties.

The internal reporting system on enforcing arbitral awards involving at least one foreign or foreign-related party was put in place as a part of an effort to combat local protectionism. If local courts make a decision not to recognize and enforce an arbitral award, the case is automatically reported to the provincial court. If the provincial court stays with the decision of the local court, the case is further reported to the Supreme Court for a final revision. The provincial courts may also reverse the outcome and decide to recognize and enforce the arbitral award. None of the cases that are enforced at lower levels are reported to higher levels. The cases that do not get enforced reach the Supreme Court, in which case the judges may choose to reverse the outcome and enforce the arbitral award.

Data published in 2015 by the research institute working under the Supreme Court shows that of the 98 cases involving at least one foreign or foreign-related party that have been reported during twenty years of the system’s existence, only 39 cases have not been enforced after the case had been reviewed by the Supreme Court. Of these 98 cases, 20 were initiated by domestic parties while 78 were initiated by foreign parties.

Prof. Shen’s findings show that while local courts have vested interests to support local parties, the Supreme Court is likely to enforce the arbitral award in favour of the claimant. As unrecognized cases are reported to the higher levels, a discriminative decision by local courts in favour of local parties is likely to be reversed and the award enforced by the Supreme Court. China ratified the New York Convention in 1986, and the Supreme Court is more inclined to follow the obligations assigned by the treaty. The Supreme Court is also more likely to support foreign investment and thus enforce an arbitration award claimed by a foreign party.

The fact that most of the cases are initiated by a foreign party indicates that foreigners are more likely to rely on the internal reporting system to receive a just outcome, whereas local courts are more likely to enforce the claims of domestic claimers. However, the rate of reversed outcomes by the Supreme Court is same both for foreign and domestic initiated cases. Prof. Shen’s analysis also indicates that protectionism is more likely to occur in economically less developed areas, whereas local courts in more economically developed regions have accumulated experience and are less likely to favour local parties.

Overall, China’s centralized arbitration awards enforcement system is a foreign-friendly mechanism. The centralization of decision-making to the Supreme Courts through the internal reporting system has been effective to combat local protectionism and is favourable towards foreign investment. However, transparency still lacks in reporting on purely domestic cases, as cases involving purely domestic arbitrary awards enforcement are not reported to the Supreme Court.

Prof. Shen and Ulla Liukkunen, Director of the China Law Center.

Dean, Professor Shen Wei is a lawyer qualified in New York practicing, mostly in Hong Kong, on foreign direct investment, private equity and mergers and acquisitions. His main research interests include financial regulation, corporate governance, international investment law and commercial arbitration. Professor Shen has published more than 130 articles in Chinese and English journals, and is the author of the books: Rethinking the New York Convention – A Law and Economics Approach (Cambridge: Intersentia 2013), The Anatomy of China’s Banking Sector and Regulation (Wolters Kluwer 2014), How Is International Economic Order Shaped? – Law, Markets and Globalisation (China Law Press 2014), Corporate Law in China: Structure, Governance and Regulation (Sweet & Maxwell 2015), and Investor Protection in Capital Markets – The Case of Hong Kong (Sweet & Maxwell 2015).

Professor Shen is an arbitrator with Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, Shanghai International Arbitration Centre, Shanghai Arbitration Commission, and Shenzhen International Court of Arbitration. He is also the Global Professor of Law, New York University School of Law, and Adjunct Research Professor at the Centre for Banking & Finance Law (CBFL), National University of Singapore.  Professor Shen Wei has visited the Center twice before. In September 2013, he spoke on international investment arbitration in China, and in May 2016, his talk involved with ADR and Arbitration of International Financial Disputes in Shanghai.

Author: Cristina D. Juola

Posted on

Prof. Liu Zuoxiang on “Chinese Structure of Social Order in a Period of Transformation”

Director of the Institute of Rule of Law and Human Rights at Shanghai Normal University, College of Philosophy, Law and Political Sciences, Professor Liu Zuoxiang held a lecture on “Chinese Structure of Social Order in a Period of Transformation” at the Finnish China Law Center on May 17, 2017. The lecture was followed by questions and comments by the discussants Guilherme Vasconcelos Vilaca, Postdoctoral Researcher at the Erik Castrén Institute, University of Helsinki, and Kangle Zhang, Research Fellow at the Erik Castrén Institute, University of Helsinki, who also worked as a translator during the lecture and discussion. After the lecture and initial comments, the audience posed questions and comments and engaged in a lively discussion.

Zhang Kangle (left), Prof. Liu (middle) and Guilherme Vasconcelos Vilaca (right).

In his lecture, Prof. Liu introduced the traditional social order that has developed in China and compared it to the contemporary one. The traditional Chinese social order was based on the “rule of Li” as opposed to the “rule of law” that exists in the contemporary society. Prof. Fei Xiaotong, a scholar on Chinese social order in the 1940s, described “Li” as a “generally acknowledged and harmonious pattern of behaviour”. The “rule of Li order”, therefore, is one based on traditions and commonly accepted norms, which are not enforced in a top-down manner but by the society itself. Citizens obey the accumulated traditions and social norms out of respect towards the society and to cultivate their moral character and self-constraint. In contrast, a “rule of law order” is maintained by political and state power and is enforced by rules and punishments.

The traditional patriarchal and clan system in China’s rural areas functioned as a source of normative control and unifying force within the community. The clan system was efficient at dealing with issues related to relationships within the clan, in matters related to marriage, property, funerals and the like, and acted as a supportive system to the official state order. However, as the example of Nancun village in Guangdong province demonstrates, patriarchal formations began to break down as a result of rural reforms and the elimination of landlords after 1949. During the second wave of reforms in 1979, state control became more lenient. Some forms of nongovernmental organization re-emerged, but failed to achieve their former authoritative position. Economic conditions improved, the village underwent urbanization, and incentives for social grassroots organization independent of state administration decreased.

Yet, China is still undergoing a transformation from a traditional society and the “rule of Li” to a modern society and the “rule of law”. The case of Nancun village is an example of how traditional order of patriarchal rule and the “rule of Li order” has been replaced by a modern social system, where state power and the rule of law have become the dominant guide for maintaining social order. Indeed, on the institutional level, the contemporary Chinese society has the elements of a modern, “rule of law” state. However, the actual social order has still elements of the “rule of Li” embedded in it, especially in rural areas, where transformation is still taking place. Prof. Li characterizes the current state of the Chinese society as a “pluralistically mixed order”, where order is maintained by the “rule of law” mixed with “rule of Li”, as well as other elements of the traditional Chinese society, such as order based on patriarchy, “rule of virtue” and the “rule of man”. The relationships between people have experienced transformations, but still contain elements of formal and informal ideas of social order.

The coexistence of modern and traditional practices within the contemporary Chinese society point out the complexity of defining the societal structure in explicit terms. The contemporary Chinese society is transforming towards a “rule of law order” and at the same time hold elements of the traditional Chinese order, which makes the current Chinese society pluralistic in nature. Elevated economic wellbeing has replaced tradition and patriarchal relationships as a measure of social standard, a trend further enforced by outside influences amongst the younger generation. However, the traditional order still lies at the basis of the contemporary one, and continues to have a strong influence on it.

Guilherme Vasconcelos Vilaca questioning whether a state has the capability to choose its model of social order or whether one naturally emerges from the reality on the ground. Photo by Zhao Yajie.

Professor Liu Zuoxiang is the Director of the Institute of Rule of Law and Human Rights, Shanghai Normal University, College of Philosophy, Law and Political Sciences. He is also the Vice director of Jurisprudence Institute of Chinese Law Society; Member of branch of Chinese IVR.

Author: Cristina D. Juola

Posted on

Mirva Lohiniva-Kerkelä holds lectures at Renmin and Fudan in China

Mirva Lohiniva-Kerkelä, Vice Dean of the University of Lapland, Faculty of Law and Associate Professor in Welfare Law, held two lectures on the Finnish model of welfare state during her visit to China in March 2017. Lohiniva-Kerkelä visited Renmin University in Beijing and Fudan University in Shanghai. During both visits, the parties discussed further developing cooperation between the Universities.

The first lecture was held at Renmin University in Beijing, where Lohiniva-Kerkelä was hosted by Professor of Civil and Commercial Law at Renmin Law School, Li Jianfei. The lecture was held on March 28, 2017, on the topic “Fulfilling Social Rights – The Development of Welfare Law in Finland,” in which Lohiniva-Kerkelä discussed Finland’s role as a Nordic welfare state. In the Nordic welfare state model, the state plays a key role in the protection and promotion of the social and economic well-being of its citizens.  Lohiniva-Kerkelä presented methods used in Finland to guarantee the fundamental human rights of citizens, using instruments such as international treaties, national constitutions, and legislation.

Prof. Lohiniva-Kerkelä and Prof. Li with a class of students at Renmin University.

On March 30, 2017, Lohiniva-Kerkelä held her second lecture at the Fudan University in Shanghai, where she was hosted by the Associate Professor of Law at Fudan University School of Law, Lu Zhian. The lecture was titled “Welfare Law and Human Rights,” and circled around the same questions – methods of ensuring basic rights to the population in a welfare state. The lectures at both universities were held to a group of doctoral and post-graduate students. During both lectures, students were eager to engage in a lively discussion on the subject.

Mirva Lohiniva-Kerkelä is one of Finland’s leading experts in social and health care law, widely welfare law. Her expertise covers especially issues of health care rights and the respective responsibilities of the state authorities and professionals in guaranteeing access to health care.

Posted on

The University of Bergen, Norway, opens a China Law Centre

On May 4, 2017, the University of Bergen in Norway celebrated the launch of a Norwegian China Law Centre. The event was opened with a welcoming speech by the Rector of the University of Bergen, Dag Rune Olsen, followed by a presentation on the Centre’s future prospects by the Dean of the University’s Law Faculty, Asbjørn Strandbakken, and Vice Dean for Education, Bjørnar Borvik, at the Faculty of Law. After the opening speeches, future prospects as well as past cases on the development of Sino-Norwegian and Sino-Nordic cooperation were presented and discussed. Speakers and other guests included representatives from the Norwegian Parliament, as well as representatives from the University’s long-time Chinese partners such as Renmin and Fudan Universities, and representatives from universities in Nordic and European countries.

Among the University of Bergen and its Nordic neighbours, the University of Helsinki has been a strong supporter of university-level cooperation in the sphere of China law research. A year ago, in May 2016, representatives from the University of Bergen visited the Finnish China Law Center at the University of Helsinki with the prospects of establishing a similar Centre in Norway. Since the visit, the decision to launch China Law Centre at the University of Bergen has only been a matter of time. The political landscape for launching the Center now, after the normalization of diplomatic and political ties between China and Norway in December 2016 (having been frozen since 2010 after Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize), is undoubtedly more favorable than a year ago, and assures a successful start for the newly launched platform for cooperation.

Dean of the University of Helsinki Law Faculty, and the Finnish China Law Center, Chair of the Board, Kimmo Nuotio, hosted the Norwegian delegation at the Finnish China Law Center with the Center’s Director Ulla Liukkunen last May. Taking part in the ceremony, Dean Nuotio congratulated the Norwegian China Law Centre for its launch and welcomed its cooperation with the Finnish China Law Center. The Chinese partners have been consistently interested in the Nordic region as a whole, and cooperation between Nordic countries in the China dimension would be beneficial to both Norway and Finland, and would be a signal to China of the brotherly relations that the Nordic countries share amongst each other.

Tu Wingking, Fudan University Law School (right), Kimmo Nuotio (middle) and Bjørnar Borvik (right) at the University of Bergen, launch of the Norwegian China Law Centre.

Amongst the individuals driving forward Sino-Norwegian cooperation at the university level, Dean  Asbjørn Strandbakken, Vice Dean Bjørnar Borvik and Law Professor at the University of Bergen, Ragna Aarli have long been involved in building the University’s cooperation with China. The launch of the China Law Centre at the University marks a great step forward in deepening such cooperation.

Author: Cristina D. Juola

Posted on

Forthcoming lectures on Chinese Social Order and System of Law by Prof. Liu Zuoxiang, Shanghai Normal University, on May 17 and 30, 2017.

 

Welcome to the lectures by Professor, Liu Zuoxiang.

Professor Liu Zuoxiang is the Director of the Institute of Rule of Law and Human Rights, Shanghai Normal University, College of Philosophy, Law and Political Sciences. He is also the Vice director of Jurisprudence Institute of Chinese Law Society; Member of branch of Chinese IVR .

 

Chinese Structure of Social Order in a Period of Transformation 

Time: 17th May 2017 at 2.15 pm-3.45 pm

Venue: Porthania Building, University of Helsinki, fifth floor, room P 545

Discussant:

Kangle Zhang, Research Fellow, Erik Castrén Institute

Guilherme Vasconcelos Vilaca, Postdoctoral Researcher, Erik Castrén Institute

After China advanced in 1996 the strategy of the rule of the country entitled “administering the country according to law and constructing a socialist country under the rule of law”, which was officially confirmed by the constitutional amendment in 1999, the issue of what kind of social order and structure pattern the Chinese society should undertake became a focus of academic debate in China for some time. Chinese scholars from the discipline of anthropology, sociology, cultural studies and legal studies have challenged the orthodoxy theory of rule of law in China. Professor Liu Zuoxiang’s talk on the “Chinese Structure of Social Order in a Period of Transformation” will discuss the disciplinary perspectives, their differences, and varying conceptions of the contemporary Chinese social order. Afterwards, Professor Liu Zuoxiang will introduce his research on the topic, focusing on the following issues:

Ⅰ. Rule of Li Order—Main Characteristics of the Traditional Chinese Social Order Structure

Ⅱ. Pluralistically Mixed Order—Main Characteristics of the Chinese Social Order Structure in the Period of transformation

Ⅲ. Chinese Scholars’ Views on State Law and Non-governmental Law

  1. How to treat the rural society in contemporary China: reality uncovered by a case study
  2. The focus of issues and conclusion

 

 

The Relationship between the Party Regulations and National Laws

Time: 30th may 2017 at 13.15 pm-14.45 pm

Venue: Porthania Building, University of Helsinki, fifth floor, room P 545

Discussant:

Kangle Zhang, Research Fellow, Erik Castrén Institute

In recent years, there is a new research focus in Chinese law field, along with some theoretical confusion: Party Regulations and National Laws. Such confusions are mainly manifested in the viewpoints of some Chinese scholars. Some scholars hold that the party constitution, the party rules and regulations should be considered as an integral part of law, the party constitution is the “unwritten constitution” of China, and the party regulations have been playing the role of law in effect.  There are also scholars who proposed that the party rules itself is already a constituent part of law.  So whether there is a boundary between the party regulations and national law or not?

While a lot of debates has centered on whether the party regulations have legal attributes, the fourth plenary session of the 18th Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee did not adopt this proposition. The session put forward that the general target of comprehensively implementing the fundamental principle of the rule of law is to “form the socialist system of laws with Chinese Characteristics and build a socialist country under the rule of law”.  The “socialist system of laws with Chinese Characteristics” is distributed into five aspects as following: “form a complete system of laws and regulations, a highly effective system to ensure the rule of law is put into effect, a stringent system to oversee the implementation of the rule of law, and a robust system to guarantee the rule of law; put in place a well-defined system of Party rules and regulations.”  It can be seen from these five systems that the first one is the system of laws and regulations and the fifth is the system of Party rules and regulations. This illustrates the fourth plenary session did not agree to regard the party rules as a part of the system of laws and regulations.  There is no need to describe them separately if the party regulations are seen as the component part of law.  However, the decision of the fourth plenary session did not patch up these arguments, the proposition about “the legal nature of party rules” is still in dispute.  Especially after the party regulations were brought into the system of the rule of law, some scholars simply think that the party rules are a constituent part of law.

Professor Liu Zuoxiang will introduce his research on the relationship between the Party Regulations and National Laws.

 

Posted on

Zhao Yajie, UH, holds presentations on Globalization and IP in Wuhan

Zhao Yajie, a doctoral researcher at the University of Helsinki, Faculty of Law held three presentations on globalization and IP at the First International Young Scholars Forum at the Wuhan University of Technology on April 21-23, 2017. The Forum invited young scholars from around the world to participate in the event to see how China has developed, and to open an academic discussion among young scholars in all fields of studies, including law. More than 120 advanced young scholars from over 36 different countries were selected from over 400 applicants to participate in the Forum. (See the news article in Chinese).

Zhao Yajie holding a presentation at Wuhan University of Technology. Photo by Wuhan University of Technology.

Ms Zhao’s area of specialty, intellectual property (IP), has been marked as one of the century’s “strategic subjects” for China. Considering the increased impact of China’s actions on the global society, the way China handles IP issues is an area of great importance and attention worldwide. In her two presentations on “Globalization and its impact on IP,” one held for a group of Social Science faculties and one for scholars, professors and experts in the field of law, Ms Zhao focused on globalization and the developments of the IP system in the Chinese context. “While it is necessary for China to fulfill the basic international requirements, this doesn’t necessarily mean that China has to go along with the EU and US centered standards on IP administrative and judicial implementations,” Ms Zhao explains in an interview with the China Law Center.

China is at this crucial transition period: its economy is transforming from an exports and labour intensive economic model to knowledge-based economy. Since China’s reform and opening-up policy, China has made great efforts in the field of IP. Its speedy catch-up on international IP norms is very impressive. Its enforcement on IP, both on judicial and administrative protections are visibly improved. However, China has a different historical and cultural context than developed western countries. “Although the Chinese government can transplant an IP system to its country, it doesn’t mean China can automatically adapt an existing model from a different context in its entirety,” Ms Zhao specifies. “On the domestic scale, China is facing its own internal challenges. Furthermore, globally speaking the IP system itself is challenged by systematic insufficiencies in this new digital era, which also needs to be considered by the Chinese government at the implementation stage of a national IP system.”

The third presentation, held to a group of more than 40 Master’s students of Chinese law, focused more on comparison of academic communication and argumentation methods in China and abroad. Under the title “Globalization and the Internationalization of China IP studies,” Ms Zhao lectured students on the differences in academic writing and argumentation between Chinese and western scholars. “Students with a China focus or a China-centered approach will find it difficult to communicate with international scholars later on, if they don’t pay attention to this aspect now” Ms Zhao says, reflecting on her own experiences. “One of the biggest challenges when I came here was how to build my argumentation,” she says referring to her experience in Finland. “It is important to build a bridge between Chinese and non-Chinese scholars early on, so their methodology and way of writing and argumentation can develop and smoothly transition into the international sphere.”

Speakers and participants of the First International Young Scholars Forum at the Wuhan University of Technology. Photo by Wuhan University of Technology.

Before her arrival to Finland in 2012, Ms Zhao started her research in legal studies in substantive law. “China is currently in a social transformation period, and massive amounts of research is being conducted in this field.” In her research at the University of Helsinki, Ms Zhao’s interests shifted towards enforcement and actual implementation. “I really appreciate the flexibility of doing research in Finland. My supervisor has been very supportive,” Ms Zhao thanks. In the field of enforcement, judicial reform, especially in regard to IP, has been the main focus since. The inspiration to pursue research on a governmental level was partly triggered by an academic project, “Legal Transplant for Innovation and Creativity – A Sino-Finnish Comparative Study on the Governance of Intellectual Property Rights” (TranSIP), which Ms Zhao participated in. In Finland, the project was led by a leading IP scholar in Finland, Prof. Niklas Bruun, and on the Chinese side, one of the most recognized key IP scholars in China, Prof. Li Mingde, from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

With new insights into the judicial reform at the governmental level, Ms Zhao is currently finalizing her doctoral monograph on the topic of China’s “catch up” on innovation and IP systems, where she doesn’t only consider enforcement or substantive law, but focuses more on national strategies regarding IP, their implementation by the judicial organ, as well as reactions of the industry to state policies and judicial practices.

Author: Cristina D. Juola