Skip to main content

"Seeking truth from facts", ideological formulas and Party/state law in China

Coat of Arms of Cologne

I have just returned from the 10th Annual Conference of the European China Law Studies AssociationThis year, the conference theme was 'New Perspectives on the Development of Law in China'. 

At the conference, I presented a paper entitled "Seeking truth from facts in Party discipline 'legislation'" The paper can be downloaded from Google Drive, or from SSRN The abstract follows below.  I would welcome comments and suggestions from my readers. 

"Seeking truth from facts in Party discipline legislation"

The separation between concepts and contexts in Western studies of Chinese law, the detachment of legal and ideological concepts from the variables that determine their meaning has shaped a tacit consensus whereby ideological formulations as “Seeking truth from facts” are void of any meaning, mere declarations of intent, or make ceremonial references to an ideology which is monolithic and unchanging. Else, these formulations have been regarded as concepts that exist in the field of politics, and sort very limited effects on the law. The hypothesis that the law may still be shaped by existing ideological formulations more than by legal concepts is almost never entertained. Therefore, most legal analyses have focussed on much more familiar legal concepts and principles – as justice, constitutionalism and others. These legal principles have been deemed powerful enough to influence domains beyond the law, impacting and perhaps reshaping the political landscape. Yet, even these seemingly familiar legal concepts have been analyzed as if they existed in a contextual void, separate from ideological, historical and cultural influences. Few efforts have been made to understand the their meaning. Alternatively, the meaning that has been bestowed upon them is not necessarily the meaning shared by those groups and actors who are directly involved in processes of law-making, interpretation and enforcement. 

This paper does not intend to provide an exegesis of law/ideology in the PRC – exegeses are continuously made and remade by political leaders, legal/political commentators, judges and law enforcement officers, and are accessible to all those willing to “impartially listen” to the political/legal field. Instead, it tries to provide an empirical illustration of one of the possible methods we may employ to disentangle the nexus between ideology and law, understand their respective weight, and the actual role ideological and legal principles and concepts play in driving change within the political-legal system. If it is accepted that law has an ideological basis any attempt to understand law in the People's Republic of China will be conditional upon placing legal concepts against their most appropriate backdrop – the ideology of the Chinese Communist Party.


Popular posts from this blog

Internship Opportunities at the Foundation for Law and International Affairs

I am delighted to share a call for internship issued by the Foundation for Law and International Affairs, an organization I am a proud member of.

FLIA Internship Opportunity

We are looking for interns from all over the world.

Who we are and what we do
FLIA is an independent nonprofit organization established in Washington, DC in 2015. As an educational and consultative think tank, FLIA is devoted to promoting global communication, cooperation, and education in the field of law and international affairs. The areas on which FLIA focuses include comparative law and culture, international crime and judicial assistance, courts and tribunals, social responsibility and sustainable development, global economics and world trade, international relations and multilateral diplomacy, global security and governance, and human rights. FLIA conducts various programs such as FLIA Conference, FLIA Dialogue, FLIA Insight, FLIA Youth, FLIA Publication, and FLIA Blog. 
Why be a FLIA intern
If you are seeking to…

A Short Response to a Reader

This post provides a short and simple response to a question I received about my short essay "民法的一般原则、党组以及“一带一路”  (available here for those who may like to read it in Chinese, and here for those who may like to read it in English). The question was received on the "法律与国际事务学会" Wechat group, following the circulation of this short essay on Chinese-language internet groups and websites. 

I am publishing my short and simple reply here because the question may be of interest to persons other than the reader who asked it (and whom shall remain anonymous). Also, my essay was written for the sole purpose of academic research and communication therefore, there is no reason why I should provide my answer within the 'four walls' of a social media group.
Question: In your commentary, you wrote “in 1957, Liu Shaoqi suggested to use the words ‘militant bastions’ in article 19 of the Constitution of the CPC to refer to the function of primary organizations, rather than to their …

Short Essay: 民法的一般原则、党组以及“一带一路”

The following short essay was produced as part of a series of commentaries on the General Provisions of Civil Law authored for the Chinese and Western public. It examines how the General Provisions of Civil Law can contribute to the construction of a transnational rule of law framework for the Belt and Road Initiative. In the essay, I discuss the General Provisions of Civil Law in relation to the legal status of Party groups in SOEs, private enterprises, and social organizations (including NGOs and Foundations) operating in China and in Western countries. My most heartfelt thanks go to Luo Qiyue and Huang Linlin, for their outstanding translation of my essay. 

民法的一般原则、党组以及“一带一路” 作者:Flora Sapio1