Source: http://researchblog.law.hku.hk/2017/
Timestamp: 2017-12-12 23:25:36
Document Index: 705778201

Matched Legal Cases: ['arty\n8', 'arty\n9', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 4', 'art 5']

HKU Legal Scholarship Blog: 2017
Posted by Ivy at 7:42 PM 1 comment: Links to this post
"Chinese Legal Reform and the Global Legal Order: Adoption and Adaptation"
edited by Yun Zhao & Michael Ng
published in November, 2017, 312 pages
Description: This volume critically evaluates the latest legal reform of China, covering major areas such as trade and securities law, online privacy law, criminal law, human rights and international law. It represents a bold departure from the most recent works on Chinese legal reform by engaging the ideas of experts in contemporary Chinese law with the archival scholarship of Chinese legal historians. This unique interdisciplinary feature affords readers a more nuanced view of the complexities and specificities of how China has problematised legal reforms in various historical contexts when building a progressive yet sustainable legal system. This volume appraises the most current reform in Chinese law by considering China's engagement with globalisation, increasingly complicated domestic situation and historical legal transplantation experiences. It will be of huge interest to students, researchers and practitioners interested in Chinese law and policy, China and Asian studies and Chinese legal history.
Posted by Ivy at 12:42 PM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: chinese law, law reform, Michael Ng, new books, Yun Zhao
"The Law, China and the World: An Introduction"
Yun Zhao & Michael Ng
in Chinese Legal Reform and the Global Legal Order: Adaption and Adoption, (Cambridge University Press, Nov 2017), pp. 1 - 12
Introductory paragraph: China has undertaken a series of legal reforms of varying scales over the past century, borrowing models from a disparate range of countries. Since the late Qing period, laws and legal concepts from Germany, France, Switzerland, Japan, the United Kingdom and United States, and the former Soviet Union, among other countries, have been transplanted into China at various times. The latest wave of legal reforms originated in the office of Xi Jinping, who set the law as the central theme of the Chinese Communist Party's Eighteenth Central Committee Plenary Session in October 2014. Yet, despite these century-long efforts, as contributor Li Chen puts it, the reformed Chinese legal system often appears 'too foreign to the Chinese and too Chinese to foreigners'...
Posted by Ivy at 12:41 PM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: chinese law, law reform, Michael Ng, Yun Zhao
Posted by Ivy at 12:38 PM No comments: Links to this post
Posted by Ivy at 12:33 PM No comments: Links to this post
Congratulations to our 8 PhD, 2 SJD and 2 MPhil. graduates who had their degrees conferred upon them at the 198th Congregation on 6 December 2017 at the University of Hong Kong. The Congregation also saw the graduation of 595 other Faculty of Law students: 18 LLM, 21 LLM in Human Rights, 80 LLM in Corporate & Financial Law, 32 Master of Common Law, 24 LLM in Chinese Law, 14 LLM in Information Technology and Intellectual Property Law, 43 LLM in Arbitration and Dispute Resolution, 1 LLM in Compliance and Regulation, 27 JD and 335 LLB. The newest members of our RPg alumnae family include the following:
1. Dr Atcharawongchai Worrawong, The Criminal Enforcement of Copyright in Thailand. Supervisors: Dr Yahong Li and Mr Michael Jackson
2. Dr Buhi Jason Gerald, The Constitutional and Administrative History of Macau During the Era of Portuguese Jurisdiction, 1553-1999. Supervisors: Professor Hualing Fu and Professor Albert Chen
3. Dr Huang Yue, Administrative Policymaking Procedures Reform in China an Anthoritarian Model of Policymaking Accountability. Supervisor: Professor Hualing Fu
4. Dr Liu Jia, Global Justice: The Right to Life and the Global Community. Supervisor: Professor Scott Veitch
5. Dr Liu Junru, Towards Cultural-Rights-Based-Approaches to Reconciling Trade Liberalization and Cultural Diversity: The Role of the WTO in Governing Trade in Motion Pictures. Supervisor: Professor Xianchu Zhang
6. Dr Liu Yang, Necessity and the Law of State Responsibility: A Contextual Approach. Supervisor: Dr James Fry
7. Dr Xu Bijun, Re-examining the Discourse of the 19th Century International Law: A Case Study of the First Sino-Japanese War 1894-1895. Supervisors: Professor C. L. Lim and Professor Tony Carty
8. Dr Zhang Xiaoshi, The Sino-French controversy over Vietnam 1880-1885 : from tributary system to international legal system. Supervisors: Professor C. L. Lim and Professor Tony Carty
9. Dr Du Rong (SJD), Unifying Space Financing Through Space Assets Protocol to the Cape Town Convention: A Desirable Effort for the Space Sector?. Supervisor: Professor Yun Zhao
10. Dr Lam Kwan Nam (SJD), Confucian Values and Corporation Governance: a Comparative Analysis. Supervisor: Professor Say Goo
11. Mr Meggitt Gary, Mediation and ADR Privilege – the Existing Law and Potential Reforms. Supervisor: Ms Janice Brabyn.
12. Ms. Wang Yihan, An Empirical Study of US and Chinese Perspectives on Barriers and Possibilities for the Expansion of Online International Commercial Arbitration. Supervisor: Dr Shahla Ali
The Honourable Madam Justice Susan Kwan (LLB 1977, PCLL 1978), Justice of Appeal of the Court of Appeal, The High Court, delivered the keynote address.
Posted by Ivy at 9:27 PM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: alumni, RPG
Posted by Simon NM Young at 8:31 AM No comments: Links to this post
"International Judges on Constitutional Courts: Cautionary Evidence from Post-Conflict Bosnia"
Abstract: Hybrid constitutional courts are associated with deeply divided and post-conflict contexts where the impartiality of the domestic judiciary is suspect. Such courts enlist international (i.e., foreign) judges to create an ostensibly neutral counterbalance to the presumed political biases of local judges. This mixed-methods case study of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia-Herzegovina questions the value of these hybrid courts. Contrary to what might be expected, the results of multidimensional scaling indicate that Bosnia's foreign judges have not provided a reliable counterbalance to apparent ethno-national divisions on the Court. Furthermore, qualitative analysis suggests that the foreign judges have contributed to several strategic mistakes that have probably harmed the Court's tenuous authority. It is also suggested that the presence of international judges on constitutional courts may actually discourage the kind of strategic behavior that is needed to build and sustain judicial power, particularly in deeply divided and post-conflict contexts.
Posted by Ivy at 10:58 AM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: Alex Schwartz, Bosnia, constitutional law, judiciary
Posted by Simon NM Young at 9:25 PM 2 comments: Links to this post
The HKU Clinical Legal Education (CLE) Centre recently helped a client win his magistracy appeal (HCMA 259/2016) in the High Court on a charge of making a false statement. HKU's Communication and Public Affairs Office summarised the news reports as follows:
A man who had been convicted of making a false statement knowingly in an application for public housing was acquitted with the help of the Free Legal Advice Scheme on HKU Campus. HKU Law Principal Lecturer Mr Eric Cheung represented the man in court and argued that the man’s $1,440 income for two days’ part-time work should not be counted as part of his “current monthly salary”. The government’s Legal Aid Department had rejected the man’s legal aid application which was only granted after the scheme’s intervention. The judge commended the scheme, saying it had helped to clarify the rights and wrongs of the case for justice to be done. (Apple Daily, Ming Pao)​
HKU Legal Scholarship Blog interviewed Eric Cheung, director of the centre, about the case, which he argued in court.
1. What was the main issue in the case?
Client was charged with having "knowingly made false statement on 2 Feb 2010 in respect of an application for a lease under the Housing Ordinance (or, in layman's terms, in his application for public housing) by declaring that his average monthly income was $12,830". The prosecution case was that apart from his fixed salary earned for that amount, he had also earned $1,440 while working as a part-time employee for RTHK on 21 and 26 Nov 2009 at a rate of $80 per hour, with payment made to him by bank transfer from RTHK into his bank account on 5 Jan 2010, but he did not declare the same. D's case at trial was that he did not know that the payment from RTHK was received on 5 Jan 2010 because he had not checked his passbook, and he did not realise at that time that he had to declare such payment as his current monthly income. The Magistrate disbelieved him and found that he had knowledge of such payment but knowingly concealed the same when declaring his monthly income as $12,830. The grounds of appeal were that: 1. What he made was not a false statement because this one-off income from RTHK in the past was not his current monthly income, as the evidence at trial showed that he no longer expected to do any further part-time work for RTHK since 26 Nov, and in particular after he had found a full-time job on 5 Dec 2009. 2. The Magistrate erred in finding that he knew that he had to declare the RTHK income and/or knew that he did receive the same on 5 Jan 2010.
2. How did the centre assist the client and court on the legal point?
D's application for legal aid was initially refused for not passing the merits test. He sought legal advice from us under our FLAS scheme. With assistance from our students on research etc, we took the view that there was merits in the appeal, and we wrote to Department of Legal Aid (DLA) accordingly. Eventually, legal aid was granted and I was assigned by DLA to represent him.
3. Who was the judge and what did he say?
It is before Deputy Judge Anthony Kwok. He allowed the appeal on my first ground, and decided that he did not need to deal with the second ground. He commended the scheme (see the above press summary). One interesting point is that the Acting Senior Public Prosecutor (Ivan Cheung) representing the Respondent is our past CLE student. He also said in open court that he found the CLE course very meaningful.
4. How do you feel about the centre's involvement in this case?
Very pleased to help rectify another miscarriage of justice. Very moved when I saw D's wife crying with relief and joy after the appeal was allowed. She said they had been under great emotional stress over the year (N.B. If the appeal failed, they were likely be evicted from the public housing). See also a comment I received from a first-year law student who attended the hearing:
"Thanks for your real-life teaching today and I really enjoyed it. I have witnessed how the judge changed his mind after hearing what you have got and looking at the evidence in detail. I realize how important to get well-prepared beforehand because you always have to be alert in court and point out inaccuracies in information that the judge and the prosecuting counsel have in mind. And most importantly, it's really a kind of special fulfillment that you can hardly find in doing commercial work when it comes to helping with the clients to fight against injustice. The clients were very emotional after the judgment and it touched me. That's what I have learnt from you and I like working as a barrister like you (though you are technically a solicitor).​"
Posted by Simon NM Young at 7:25 PM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: clinical programme, criminal law, Eric Cheung, KE
The University of Hong Kong adopts the highest standards of research integrity for its staff and students. The Faculty of Law is pleased to announce the launch of a new website to guide users on the rules, procedures and questions related to research integrity in the law school context. The website has many short articles on the principles of research integrity, good research practices and research misconduct. It also features case studies and video recordings of trainers who have spoken at the University of Hong Kong. The website will serve as a valuable resource for staff and students who are applying for research ethics approval or seeking guidance on important topics in research integrity such as accountability, honesty, objectivity, openness, due diligence, fairness in giving credit and nurturing students and early-career research colleagues. The website can be accessed at http://www.law.hku.hk/researchintegrity/.
Posted by Simon NM Young at 6:19 PM 1 comment: Links to this post
Labels: new website, research integrity
"The Practice of International Commercial Arbitration : A Handbook for Hong Kong Arbitrators"
October 2017, 211 pp.
Description: Focusing on practical principles or guidelines for arbitrators, this book covers everything a prospective international commercial arbitrator should know about conducting an arbitration in Hong Kong. Specifically geared to those interested in or starting work as an international commercial arbitrator in Hong Kong, the book takes readers step-by-step through the problems that are likely to arise in the conduct of a commercial arbitration and in the development of their careers as international commercial arbitrators.
Posted by Ivy at 12:32 PM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: Anselmo Reyes, arbitration, commercial law, new books
Posted by Ivy at 10:34 PM No comments: Links to this post
"Youth Civic Engagement in Hong Kong: A Glimpse into Two Systems Under One China"
Liz Jackson, Puja Kapai, Shiru Wang, and Ching Yin Leung
in Broom, Catherine (Ed.), Youth Civic Engagement in a Globalized World
Citizenship Education in Comparative Perspective (Palgrave Macmillan US), ch 4
Introduction: This chapter examines youth perceptions regarding civic engagement during a tumultuous time in Hong Kong. We begin by examining the historical context of Hong Kong, tracing changes in its political status and educational system in relation to civil attitudes and behaviors of its population over time, particularly as Hong Kong shifted from a colony of the British Empire to a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of the People's Republic of China towards the end of the twentieth century. Next, the chapter discusses the findings of a study of Hong Kong youth perceptions of civic engagement, comparing the views of youth with two distinct prior experiences of civic education: university students in Hong Kong who were previously educated in Hong Kong or Mainland China. The study reveals significant differences between these groups, with important implications for reforming civic education in Hong Kong.
Posted by Ivy at 9:26 AM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: civic engagement, one country two systems, Puja Kapai
"Investor-State Mediation and the Rise of Transparency in International Investment Law: Opportunity or Threat?"
2017 winter, Vol. 45, p. 225
Introduction: Today, more than ever, the role of investor-state mediation cannot be appraised without regard to the mounting concerns against investor-state arbitration. Investment treaties typically protect nationals of one Contracting Party (natural persons or corporations) when realizing investments in the other Contracting Party State. The most common form of such treaties is the bilateral investment treaty (BIT). As of today, more than 2,800 BITs have been concluded, 2,100 of which are in force. To these treaties one may add regional free trade agreements that include investment chapters or regional investment treaties. One of the many examples is Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that covers investments. All of these treaties provide for substantive rights and protections such as the prohibition against uncompensated expropriation and various non-discriminatory standards. However, investment treaties have [*226] attained their present recognition due to their dispute settlement provisions and particularly the investor-state arbitration clause almost mechanically inserted in the majority of such treaties. This arbitration clause enables investors to directly sue the host state for breaches of the investment treaty in an international arbitral tribunal typically comprised of three members. Investor-state arbitrations are either ad hoc or institutional, with the most well regarded institutional body being the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) established by the Washington 1965 Convention.
Over the past three decades, investor-state arbitration proliferated with ICSID registering fifty cases per year and administering more than two hundred at any given time. The most frequent respondent states are Argentina (more than fifty cases), Venezuela, Czech Republic, Egypt, Canada, Mexico, Ecuador, India, Ukraine, Poland, and the United States. The increasing use of investor-state arbitration has also been met with opposition and a widespread consensus for the need of reform. Over the past few years, Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela withdrew from the ICSID Convention and terminated a considerable number of BITs. More recently, South Africa and Indonesia have also filed notices to [*227] terminate BITs.
The opposition towards investor-state arbitration stems, in many regards, from the characteristics of such contemporary dispute settlement procedures. In a nutshell, a significant number of investment arbitration cases involve investment in public service sectors and public utilities; investment claims arising out of emergency economic measures or civil unrest; and cases that revolve around issues of public health, environmental regulation, and human rights, in general. Moreover, investor-state cases often involve allegations of state misconduct and corruption, are costly dispute settlement procedures, and the payment of compensation in connection with any arising arbitration awards is borne by the taxpayers of the host state. All these factors are to the interest of the local population as the objectives of foreign investors, governments, and local populations are oftentimes conflicting. Investor-state arbitration has also been criticized for enabling the so-called "regulatory chill", which is a hesitancy to implement a higher degree of regulation in fear of investment arbitration claims. [*228] As later discussed in this article, another source of concern for investor-state arbitration is the lack of transparency in such transnational proceedings. Finally, another concern that is frequently raised is the use of investor-state arbitration to circumvent national courts and the perceived bias of arbitrators, that act both as counsel and as arbitrator in related proceedings.
The above concerns have influenced the drafting of contemporary investment treaties and have also led to initiatives seeking to reform some of the perceived deficiencies of international investment law. The most notable of such initiatives is the rise of transparency discussed in Part IV of this article. Suffice however to say, that it should not be hard to see that greater transparency in investor-state arbitration is aimed at alleviating some of the concerns referred to above. Investor-state mediation is nevertheless a pre-arbitration dispute resolution method that, if successful, eliminates the need to pursue investor-state arbitration. However, as we will see, mediation in general and investor-state mediation in particular, is highly confidential. Would this then mean that investor-state mediation may be used in order to circumvent national courts without the need to adhere to the increasing standards of transparency and other public concerns that are sought to be addressed when it comes to investor-state arbitration? In other words, if the concerns raised with regard to investor-state arbitration have merit, why shouldn't they be applicable with respect to any investor-state dispute settlement proceeding? In addition to these questions, one should also take into account that the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) is considering a multilateral convention on the enforcement of mediated settlements. If this treaty were to be concluded, would it mean that investor-state mediation would not only be a convenient method to avoid [*229] the high levels of transparency now paradigmatic to investor-state arbitration, but would also enjoy high levels of international enforceability?
For now, these arguably legitimate concerns may be kept as a working hypothesis, or an issue to be determined after the apposition of three tenets. The first is the role of negotiation and pre-arbitration consultations in international investment law discussed in Part II of this article. With respect to this tenet, this article shows that investment treaties usually provide for negotiation and pre-arbitration consultation periods as a means to promote the amicable resolution of disputes between investors and host states. Given however that investor-state mediation is a distinct dispute resolution method, an examination of negotiation and pre-arbitration consultation periods is required in order to more fully detail the role and potential use of investor-state mediation. The second tenet is dealt with in Part II that focuses on the development and evolution of investor-state mediation as a distinct pre-arbitration dispute resolution procedure. Specific weight is given to two recent developments, the adoption by the International Bar Association (IBA) of a distinct set of rules for investor-state mediation that took place in 2012, and the appearance of distinct investor-state mediation provisions in recent investment treaties. Finally, the third tenet is the rise of transparency in investor-state arbitration that is discussed in Part III. In particular, this part lays out the main characteristics of the UNCITRAL Rule on Transparency and of the Mauritius Convention on Transparency in investor-state arbitration. With these three tenets in place, Part V, analyzes the implications of transparency in international investment law to the future role and importance of investor-state mediation.
Posted by Ivy at 7:30 AM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: dispute resolution, international law, investment treaties, investor-state mediation, RPG, Shahla Ali
"Debiasing regulators: The behavioral economics of US administrative law"
October 2017, Vol. 46, Issue 3
Abstract: Behavioral economics has revolutionized American legal scholarship in many areas of law, but not in administrative law, the law that regulates the regulators. This article theorizes that the administrative law doctrines developed by the Supreme Court of the United States strikingly resemble a system of ‘debiasing’ devices developed to counteract bureaucratic and judicial behavioral failures in just the areas that they matter most. A strong, alternative, justification may thus exist for the enduring paradox of American administrative law that administrators should be prepared to have their substantive decisions scrutinized by ‘hard look’ reviewing courts, while judges should be ready to defer to agencies on questions of statutory interpretation.
Posted by Ivy at 4:44 AM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: administrative law, Eric Ip, law and economics, US law
Bryane Michael & Say Goo Corporate Governance Regulatory Reform in Hong Kong (Business Law Review)
"What Does Corporate Governance Regulation in Hong Kong Teach Us About Incremental Legal Change?"
Bryane Michael & Say Goo
2017, Vol. 38, Issue 3, pp. 89-100
Abstract: Why does regulatory change occur much more slowly in some jurisdictions than in others? In this article, we look at the gradualist pace of Hong Kong’s corporate governance-related regulatory reform – particularly with regard to shareholder protection. We extend the concept of ‘legal transactions costs’ to explain such slow change. Costs of learning, experimenting and satisfying various constituencies about the advantages to their own interests of such reform represent some of these legal transactions costs. We describe how such legal transactions costs have worked against the creation of a minority shareholders’ association, the professionalization of board-directorships and the incorporation of soft law provisions in the Hong Kong Stock Exchange’s Listing Rules into hard law. We describe what the end result of such reform might look like – to assess the gap between current and possibly reformed corporate governance.
Posted by Ivy at 9:46 PM No comments: Links to this post
Posted by Simon NM Young at 4:37 PM No comments: Links to this post
Michael Ng on Access to Justice in Rural China: A History of Atypical Legal Development and Legal Service Provision (The China Review)
"Nonprofessional Access to Justice in Rural China: A History of Atypical Legal Development and Legal Service Provision"
October 2017, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 59-86
Abstract: This article provides a corrective to the conventional discourse on legal development in modern and contemporary China. By mapping the landscape of nonprofessional legal service provision crossing over modern and contemporary history, this research proposes a new analytical framework for understanding lawyering, professionalization, and access to justice in China. Previous studies present an urban-centric view and highlight the alternativeness and transitional nature of nonprofessional legal service providers (who operate primarily in rural China) vis-à-vis the professionally trained and qualified lawyers (who serve primarily in urban China). The urban-oriented discourse downplays, if not ignores, the historical fact that the ordinary people of China, mostly residing in rural areas, have relied on nonprofessional legal workers as their mainstream access to justice for centuries, with demand for their services remaining largely unchanged throughout the Qing, Republican, Mao, and post-Mao eras despite the attempted monopolization of the legal market by qualified lawyers. This article therefore argues for a reorientation of the conventional inquiry concerning the path toward the professionalization of lawyering in China that is framed in terms of license-based expertise and access. Rural legal workers, this article further argues, will, and should be allowed to, continue to meet the legal demand of the broader rural masses in China, demand that can hardly be met by the socially elite qualified lawyers practicing in urbanized China and provide, together with the qualified legal profession, dual-core access to justice in China.
Posted by Ivy at 7:45 PM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: access to justice, chinese courts, legal history, Michael Ng
Shitong Qiao on Dealing with Illegal Housing: What Can New York City Learn from Shenzhen (Fordham Urban LJ)
"Dealing with Illegal Housing: What Can New York City Learn from Shenzhen?"
2016, Vol. 43, Issue 3, pp. 743-769
Abstract: In New York City, owners violated zoning regulations and opened up their basements, garages, and other floors to rent to people (particularly low-income immigrants) priced out of the formal market. The more than 100,000 illegal dwelling units in New York City (NYC) were referred to as “granny units,” “illegal twos or threes,” or “accessory units.” Due to the safety and habitability considerations of “alter[ing] or modif[ying] of an existing building to create an additional housing unit without first obtaining approval from the New York City Department of Buildings (DOB),” the City government devoted a lot of resources to detecting and stopping such illegal conversion. Recently, however, Mayor Bill de Blasio proposed to legalize such illegal dwelling units to increase the City’s rent-regulated housing stock. The question remains as to whether crackdown or legalization is the right policy. Such illegal housing is not unique to NYC. Shenzhen, a city in south China that experienced a population explosion from 300,000 to over 10 million within three decades, faces the same problem as NYC: legal housing supply cannot catch up with the population growth, resulting in prevalent illegal housing supply. Almost half of Shenzhen’s buildings have been built illegally and now host over eight million migrant workers and low-income residents. In the past three decades, the Shenzhen city government has swung between legalization and crackdown of such illegal buildings, neither of which has resolved the problem. Due to the large number of illegal apartments, the “crackdown” option has proven to be impossible, while legalization has incurred huge information costs and encouraged more illegal constructions. In more recent years, though, the Shenzhen city government has discovered an effective policy: Keeping the city government’s zoning power intact while granting an option to owners of illegal housing to buy an exemption. The lesson from Shenzhen is that options matter at least as much as the allocation of initial entitlements. In the case of prevalent zoning violations, these options should be granted to parties that have the best information to make decisions — the numerous individual owners rather than the government. I propose that this optional zoning approach should be taken in dealing with illegal housing in New York City. Click here to download the full article.
Posted by Ivy at 10:25 PM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: chinese law, land law, Shitong Qiao, urban law
Rong Du on China's Approach to Space Sustainability: Legal and Policy Analysis (Space Policy)
"China's approach to space sustainability: Legal and policy analysis"
Rong Du (SJD 2017)
Introduction: The concept “space sustainability” came to the landscape of international space community in response to the increasing concerns over the safety and security of outer space in recent years, especially the risk posed by long-lived space debris. By far, there is no agreed definition on space sustainability. It often appears in association with space safety and space security or encompasses the meaning of safety and security in outer space, with an emphasis on the long-term impact of current space activities and due considerations deserved by future generations.1 The threats to space assets may come from the collision risk posed by orbital debris and asteroid or interferences from hazardous space weather.2 Space debris is the most serious issue. States have been dealing with space debris from two perspectives, debris mitigation and removal, and monitoring space debris through space situational awareness (SSA) capability. China started to develop the space industry since the 1950s and has carried out various space programs. After efforts of several decades, it has become autonomous in the construction and launch of satellite. By far, it possesses almost 150 satellites in orbit. It also has made remarkable progress in the exploratory and scientific missions, such as human space flight and lunar exploration. It will continue to give a high priority to the space sector for the purpose of boosting economic growth and safeguarding national security. Yet, due to the lack of national space policy, there have always been concerns on how China will carry out space activities in a responsible and sustainable way. The previous researches discussed China's performance in tackling space debris from the legal perspective. But they overlooked the policy aspect and did not address the implications of the civil-military relationship for the space sector. Among the external observers, there are different understandings toward China's strategy in outer space. The 2007 anti-satellite (ASAT) test is often cited as an evidence of China's ignorance to the sustainability of outer space environment. Yet the underlying causes should be carefully studied, other than widely speculated. Meanwhile, China has become more proactive in the multilateral efforts aiming to create new norms for space sustainability. Its participation carries substantial weight in the conclusion of the agreements. These instruments, once adopted, will contribute to shape China's behaviors in outer space. This paper examines the parameters that are affecting China's approach to space sustainability and suggests how China could make systematic efforts toward space sustainability, with a major focus on the civil-military interaction. Part 2 reviews the space governance structure and the progress made by China by far. Part 3 examines the 2007 ASAT test from the perspectives of the civil-military gap, the US's responses, and the military sector's narratives on space strategy. Part 4 further discusses to what extent the newly created Central National Security Commission (CNSC) and the military reform will fill the civil-military gap and facilitate the deliberation of space policy. Part 5 draws the correlation between ASAT capability and the Treaty on Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects (PPWT) and discusses the political factors pertaining to the prospect of the PPWT. It also discusses how far China is from the International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities (ICoC), taking into account the interactions between the PPWT and the ICoC.
Posted by Ivy at 7:01 AM No comments: Links to this post
Labels: chinese law, RPG, space law, Zhao Yun