Browse results

Editor: Hubert Bazin
The Ricci Dictionary of Chinese Law (in Simplified Chinese) includes approximately 24,000 Chinese legal terms used by Chinese and foreign lawyers in mainland China, transcribed into pinyin and translated into English and French. The Dictionary was prepared between 2006 and 2018 by a team of French and Chinese lawyers, as well as American, Canadian, English and Australian contributors, under the guidance of the Ricci Association, in order to complete and supplement the “ Grand dictionnaire Ricci de la langue chinoise” (also named “Grand Ricci”, a dictionary published in 2001 encompassing more than 300,000 terms). The Ricci Dictionary of Chinese Law aims to provide a tool for translators of Chinese legal documents, but it is also aimed at researchers, academics, students, attorneys and lawyers who have an interest in Chinese law.

Le Dictionnaire Ricci du droit chinois (édition en caractères simplifiés) comprend environ 24.000 termes chinois utilisés par les juristes chinois et étrangers en Chine continentale, transcrits en pinyin et traduits en anglais et en français. Cet ouvrage a été préparé entre 2006 et 2018 par une équipe d’avocats et juristes principalement français et chinois, mais aussi américains, canadiens, britanniques et australiens, pour enrichir le Grand dictionnaire Ricci de la langue chinoise, connu sous le nom de « Grand Ricci », qui traduit plus de 300,000 termes et a été publié sous l’égide de l’ Association Ricci du grand dictionnaire de la langue chinoise en 2001. Le dictionnaire Ricci du droit chinois entend servir d’instrument de travail aux traducteurs de documents juridiques, mais aussi aux chercheurs, universitaires, étudiants, avocats et juristes intéressés par le droit chinois.
Author: Di Wang

The Chinese state acts in concert with the patriarchal family to sustain its authoritarian legitimacy, and both institutions are grounded in paternalistic cultural norms. The state also harnesses the “quality” of Chinese families through the law, which often saddles women with more burdens and responsibilities than it does men. From the 1950 Marriage Law to the 2015 Universal Two-Child Policy, the state has directly politicized the family through explicit mandates on marriage and reproductive control as well as repressive deployment of families as a tool for social stability and national security. To unpack this state-family project, this article addresses how the patriarchal state constructs and manages a filial nationalist population in order to secure its authoritarian rule. Through the lens of emerging Chinese feminist and queer scholarship on families, this article also asks how the state-family project has affected people and families that are intersectionally marginalized by gender, sexuality, class, household registration [hukou 户口], and so on. Lastly, this article spotlights new developments in feminist and lgbtq movements as they advocate for marginalized individuals and families.

In: China Law and Society Review
Author: Ke Li

Taking the latest round of lawmaking in China as a point of departure, this article provides an in-depth examination of women’s land rights on paper and their dispossession of land in reality. To explain the gap between the two, I draw on the extant literature as well as my field research in southwestern China to illustrate the mechanisms responsible for unequal access to farmland between women and men. In illuminating these mechanisms, this article unpacks how, over the past four decades, the combination of ostensibly gender-neutral state policies, seemingly progressive legislation, and ingrained cultural prescriptions and practices has produced profoundly gendered disparities in land use. If state policies and legislation are indeed part of the problem, they must be part of the solution. Decisionmakers at the commanding heights, however, have showed little will to effect sweeping changes aimed at safeguarding women’s access to land. Instead, they have opted for piecemeal, fragmented, and localized measures in the hope of chipping away at gender inequality in land possession and management. These tepid measures will have grave implications for women’s land use and rights contention in the years to come.

In: China Law and Society Review
Editor: Hubert Bazin
The Ricci Dictionary of Chinese Law (in Traditional Chinese) includes approximately 24,000 Chinese legal terms used by Chinese and foreign lawyers in mainland China, transcribed into pinyin and translated into English and French. It was prepared between 2006 and 2018 by a team of French and Chinese lawyers, as well as American, Canadian, English and Australian contributors, under the guidance of the Ricci Association, in order to complete and supplement the “ Grand dictionnaire Ricci de la langue chinoise” (also named “Grand Ricci”, a dictionary published in 2001 encompassing more than 300,000 terms). The Ricci Dictionary of Chinese Law aims at providing a tool for translators of Chinese legal documents, but it is also aimed at researchers, academics, students, attorneys and lawyers who have an interest in Chinese law.

Le dictionnaire Ricci du droit chinois (édition en caractères traditionnels) comprend environ 24.000 termes chinois utilisés par les juristes chinois et étrangers en Chine continentale, transcrits en pinyin et traduits en anglais et en français. Cet ouvrage a été préparé entre 2006 et 2018 par une équipe d’avocats et juristes principalement français et chinois, mais aussi américains, canadiens, britanniques et australiens, pour enrichir le Grand dictionnaire Ricci de la langue chinoise, connu sous le nom de « Grand Ricci », qui traduit plus de 300,000 termes et a été publié sous l’égide de l’ Association Ricci du grand dictionnaire de la langue chinoise en 2001. Le dictionnaire Ricci du droit chinois entend servir d’instrument de travail aux traducteurs de documents juridiques, mais aussi aux chercheurs, universitaires, étudiants, avocats et juristes intéressés par le droit chinois.
In Korean Nonprofit/Non-Government Sector Research, Sung-Ju Kim and Jin-Kyung Jung review the various aspects of the nonprofit sector in South Korea. The authors discuss the historical progress of the South Korean nonprofit sector; the internal and external environments of the nonprofit sector; its legal aspects and financial resources; collaboration among nonprofit, for-profit, and government agencies; and current challenges for the nonprofit sector in South Korea.

Abstract

Discourses on the nonprofit sector and civil society have elevated awareness of the significant growth of the sector’s roles and responsibilities since the early 1990s in South Korea (hereafter simply Korea). The nonprofit sector has played significant roles in promoting economic progress and democracy in Korea. Based on extensive empirical research and government statistics, this article presents the nature of the Korean nonprofit sector from various angles, including terminology, history, legal frames, size and dimensions, financial resources, changes in philanthropy and volunteer cultures, and social economic perspectives. In addition, the authors discuss contemporary issues for the nonprofit sector based on changes in the social environment.

In discussing the magnitude of the Korean nonprofit sector, this article makes three arguments. First, we confirm that the Korean nonprofit sector has rapidly grown in multidimensional aspects as the legal systems for the nonprofits have developed in Korea since World War II. The growth has been accelerated by strong government supports and initiatives. Second, we argue that lack of conceptual frameworks to identify the nonprofit sector and lack of a centralized administration system have hindered fully catching up on the nature of the nonprofit sector in Korea. Multiple legal frameworks and excessively complicated governing systems for the nonprofit sector have inhibited understanding the size and dimensions of the Korean nonprofit sector. This article further diagnoses the financial structures and the contemporary issues for the Korean nonprofit sector, discussing key suggestions for developing it.

In: Korean Nonprofit/Non-Government Sector Research
In: China Law and Society Review
Author: Ethan Michelson

Figuring prominently in prevailing portraits of activism and political contention in contemporary China are weiquan [rights defense] lawyers. Outside of China, the word weiquan emerged in the early 2000s and had achieved near-hegemonic status by the late 2000s as a descriptive label for a corps of activist lawyers—who numbered between several dozen and several hundred—committed to the cause and mobilizing in pursuit of human rights protections vis-à-vis China’s authoritarian party-state. This article challenges the dominant nomenclature of Chinese activism, in which weiquan in general and weiquan lawyers in particular loom large. A semantic history of the word weiquan, traced through an analysis of four decades of officially sanctioned rights discourse, reveals its politically legitimate origins in the official lexicon of the party-state. Unique survey data collected in 2009 and 2015 demonstrate that Chinese lawyers generally understood the word in terms of the party-state’s official language of rights, disseminated through its ongoing public legal education campaign. Because the officially-sanctioned meaning of weiquan, namely “to protect citizens’ lawful rights and interests,” is consistent with the essential professional responsibility of lawyers, fully half of a sample of almost 1,000 practicing lawyers from across China self-identified as weiquan lawyers. Such a massive population of self-identified weiquan lawyers—approximately 80,000 in 2009 assuming that the sample is at least reasonably representative—makes sense only if local meanings of the term profoundly diverge from its dominant English-language representations. Concluding speculations consider and call for further research on why this word was appropriated and redefined by activist Chinese lawyers in the first place.

In: China Law and Society Review
Authors: Ling Li and Wenzhang Zhou

By focusing on the underlit corners of authoritarian governance in China, this article challenges the thesis that constitutions matter to authoritarian regimes because they provide solutions for problems of governance. We argue to the contrary: the constitution appeals to the Chinese Communist Party (the Party or the ccp) because it does not provide solutions to fundamental issues of governance. Instead, such issues are kept out of the constitution so that they can be addressed by the Party through other regulatory mechanisms outside of the constitutional realm. In support of our thesis, we provide a unique review of the most up-to-date authoritative research on three key constitutional issues: central-local relations, party-state relations and power relations in the Politburo. These three issues correspond to three distinctive fields in China studies that were treated only in isolation but here we consider them together under the single framework of authoritarian constitutional governance.

In: China Law and Society Review
Author: Ewan Smith

This article reviews the development of three important themes in the Chinese Communist Party’s (ccp’s) description of the rule of law since China’s opening up and reform began in December 1978. It expands upon key Party documents that frame the meaning of the rule of law in ccp doctrine. It sets out the doctrine, identifies significant changes, and considers what they might mean for the Party’s present stance toward law and legal construction. It builds upon a broad literature that explores those documents and that doctrine, focusing on three connected points of tension in the Party’s articulation: the relationship between rule of law and rule by law, the relationship between the rule of law and Party leadership, and the relationship between the rule of law and Party discipline.

In: China Law and Society Review