File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1017/S1744552307003023
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85010692878
- WOS: WOS:000212565000002
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Why did they not take on the disputes? Law, power and politics in the decision-making of Chinese courts
Title | Why did they not take on the disputes? Law, power and politics in the decision-making of Chinese courts |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2007 |
Citation | International Journal of Law in Context, 2007, v. 3, n. 3, p. 203-225 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Chinese courtsâ recent refusal to take on some disputes raises questions on the extent to which they are controlled by superior political powers in their region. Through a close examination of the handling process of âMarried Out Womenâ disputes, this article shows that lower courts in Guangdong Province, China, have effectively resisted pressure to solve the disputes. Arguing legal barriers and enforcement difficulties, the courts ultimately referred the disputes to the governments but agreed to review the governmentsâ decisions in administrative litigation. In so doing, the courts retain an advantageous position in the power relationship with the governments. The article argues that Chinese courts are capable of deliberating about and transforming their situation by strategically interpreting the law and negotiating with superior powers. It suggests that judicial independence in China is far more complicated than is often recognised, and that judicial behaviour cannot be adequately explained without thick descriptions and understanding of the legal arguments, resource constraints and strategic interpretations open to the courts, in context. © 2007, Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/251197 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 0.6 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.184 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | he, Xin | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-02-01T01:54:52Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2018-02-01T01:54:52Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2007 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | International Journal of Law in Context, 2007, v. 3, n. 3, p. 203-225 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1744-5523 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/251197 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Chinese courtsâ recent refusal to take on some disputes raises questions on the extent to which they are controlled by superior political powers in their region. Through a close examination of the handling process of âMarried Out Womenâ disputes, this article shows that lower courts in Guangdong Province, China, have effectively resisted pressure to solve the disputes. Arguing legal barriers and enforcement difficulties, the courts ultimately referred the disputes to the governments but agreed to review the governmentsâ decisions in administrative litigation. In so doing, the courts retain an advantageous position in the power relationship with the governments. The article argues that Chinese courts are capable of deliberating about and transforming their situation by strategically interpreting the law and negotiating with superior powers. It suggests that judicial independence in China is far more complicated than is often recognised, and that judicial behaviour cannot be adequately explained without thick descriptions and understanding of the legal arguments, resource constraints and strategic interpretations open to the courts, in context. © 2007, Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | International Journal of Law in Context | - |
dc.title | Why did they not take on the disputes? Law, power and politics in the decision-making of Chinese courts | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1017/S1744552307003023 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85010692878 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 3 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 3 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 203 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 225 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1744-5531 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000212565000002 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 1744-5523 | - |