Search Results
Specifically, he addresses these key questions. First, how were Chinese laws, and the quasi-legal norms that created a system of legal pluralism in Qing, reformed by the drive for legal modernization in the late Qing and Republican China as a response to the challenge of western laws? And second, how was the pluralistic structure of Chinese laws and norms in Qing China diffused and transplanted to Taiwan, Hong Kong and South East Asia in the form of ‘Chinese customary law’? Also, how was Chinese law subdued by the imposed legal systems of the colonisers, mainly Great Britain and Japan?
Specifically, he addresses these key questions. First, how were Chinese laws, and the quasi-legal norms that created a system of legal pluralism in Qing, reformed by the drive for legal modernization in the late Qing and Republican China as a response to the challenge of western laws? And second, how was the pluralistic structure of Chinese laws and norms in Qing China diffused and transplanted to Taiwan, Hong Kong and South East Asia in the form of ‘Chinese customary law’? Also, how was Chinese law subdued by the imposed legal systems of the colonisers, mainly Great Britain and Japan?
Abstract
This chapter investigates the imposition of the British colonial legal system to Hong Kong. The focus is the response of the Hong Kong government to the change from the pluralistic legal order in Republican China. In 1953, the Hong Kong government published the Strickland Report on Chinese laws and customs in order to reform Chinese customary practices in Hong Kong. The report was compiled in response to legislative and customary changes in Taiwan and in the newly declared People’s Republic of China. By examining government archives related to the Strickland Report, the chapter investigates the general application of Chinese customary laws in Hong Kong and the reasons that this report in 1956 failed to be adopted by the colonial government. The Strickland Report was the first attempt by the colonial government to deal with the changing marriage laws in China since the Qing government. The reforms proposed by the Strickland Report were ultimately rejected in 1956 due to the opposition by senior Chinese figures in Hong Kong.
Abstract
This book explores and theorizes academic discourses about legal pluralism and legal culture in the traditional Chinese legal system as exemplified in the Qing dynasty. The discussion places the Qing legal system (and quasi-legal norms) in the broader context of political and social control in the Qing government. In addition, it also theorizes the diffusion of traditional Chinese laws and legal culture to other territories (e.g., Taiwan, Hong Kong, Malaya, and the Straits Settlements) and shows that the state laws and pluralistic norms in Qing China became legal pluralism in these territories.
Abstract
This chapter discusses the quasi-legal order and the contested legal space in the administration of justice by local magistrates in Qing dynasty under the notion of avoiding litigation. Starting with the Sacred Edict of the Kangxi Emperor, which emphasized the important role of the local magistrate in avoiding litigation. Based on extant case materials and local archives, this chapter investigates the avoidance of litigation at local levels and the promotion of administrative or judicial mediation as a way to construct a social order for promoting peace and harmony in local communities.
Abstract
In the Qing dynasty, one of the main characteristics of Chinese legal culture was legal pluralism. The pluralistic norms were contested and negotiated with the imported Western legal concepts in response to the challenges of Western legal norms due to imperialism and global trade, but remained intact. The spread of Chinese laws to other jurisdictions, such as Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the Straits Settlements, also introduced new challenges in these other jurisdictions with regard to adopting Chinese laws for their Chinese communities. The Qing Chinese laws were then adopted, adapted, and absorbed into their colonial legal systems, which then formed a pluralistic colonial legal order.