Human rights have always been the focus of disputes between China and the West. To make a better China story about human rights and enhance China’s international discourse power in the field of human rights, we propo...Human rights have always been the focus of disputes between China and the West. To make a better China story about human rights and enhance China’s international discourse power in the field of human rights, we propose the text construction, translation and communication path of the construction of the human rights discourse system with Chinese characteristics from the cross-disciplinary perspective. Based on the examples of prevention and control of the CoVID-19 pandemic under the concept of putting people first, mainstream diplomatic linguistic data relevant to the fight against the novel coronavirus was collected through the internet. The human rights discourse with Chinese characteristics is constructed through a variety of texts focusing on putting the people first, the right to life, the right to health, the right to information, the right to privacy, the right to work and a sense of a community with a shared future for human beings. The core concepts of human rights have experienced the deepening process of decontextualization, abstraction and theorization to gradually conform to the expression habits of international audiences. The international communication effect is mainly positive in civil society. It shows that the construction of China’s human rights discourse system and the governance of international human rights discourse have achieved preliminary results. To enhance China’s discourse power on human rights, we need to add an interdisciplinary approach.展开更多
The Whaling in the Antarctic Case (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening) decided by the International Court of Justice (hereinafter "ICJ" or "the Court") on 31 March 2014 dealt with the inte...The Whaling in the Antarctic Case (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening) decided by the International Court of Justice (hereinafter "ICJ" or "the Court") on 31 March 2014 dealt with the interpretation of specific provisions of the 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), in particular Article VIII.1, and its complementary instruments, i.e., the Schedule and the Annexes of the International Whaling Commission Scientific Committee. The decision of the Court was a remarkable good one. However, its rigorous reasoning focused almost exclusively on the required purpose of "scientific research" of the JARPA II Programme1 permits as set out in the ICRW, approaching the convention as an autonomous self-contained regime which leaves aside other additional grounds. Nonetheless, it would be beneficial for further jurisdictional developments to strengthen the scope of the ICWR system with the applicable provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and other treaties and institutions impinging on whales and whaling, e.g., CITES, Bonn Convention, Antarctic Treaty System, among others. The query remains concerning the unexplored sources of international law ruling Antarctic spaces and species which are absent in the judgment of the Court but may allow an evolutive interpretation of the ICRW.展开更多
基金the major project of National Social Science Foundation of China,“Discourse Construction, Translation and Communication of Major-Country Diplomacy with Chinese Characteristics”(Project No. 17ZDA318)
文摘Human rights have always been the focus of disputes between China and the West. To make a better China story about human rights and enhance China’s international discourse power in the field of human rights, we propose the text construction, translation and communication path of the construction of the human rights discourse system with Chinese characteristics from the cross-disciplinary perspective. Based on the examples of prevention and control of the CoVID-19 pandemic under the concept of putting people first, mainstream diplomatic linguistic data relevant to the fight against the novel coronavirus was collected through the internet. The human rights discourse with Chinese characteristics is constructed through a variety of texts focusing on putting the people first, the right to life, the right to health, the right to information, the right to privacy, the right to work and a sense of a community with a shared future for human beings. The core concepts of human rights have experienced the deepening process of decontextualization, abstraction and theorization to gradually conform to the expression habits of international audiences. The international communication effect is mainly positive in civil society. It shows that the construction of China’s human rights discourse system and the governance of international human rights discourse have achieved preliminary results. To enhance China’s discourse power on human rights, we need to add an interdisciplinary approach.
文摘The Whaling in the Antarctic Case (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening) decided by the International Court of Justice (hereinafter "ICJ" or "the Court") on 31 March 2014 dealt with the interpretation of specific provisions of the 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), in particular Article VIII.1, and its complementary instruments, i.e., the Schedule and the Annexes of the International Whaling Commission Scientific Committee. The decision of the Court was a remarkable good one. However, its rigorous reasoning focused almost exclusively on the required purpose of "scientific research" of the JARPA II Programme1 permits as set out in the ICRW, approaching the convention as an autonomous self-contained regime which leaves aside other additional grounds. Nonetheless, it would be beneficial for further jurisdictional developments to strengthen the scope of the ICWR system with the applicable provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and other treaties and institutions impinging on whales and whaling, e.g., CITES, Bonn Convention, Antarctic Treaty System, among others. The query remains concerning the unexplored sources of international law ruling Antarctic spaces and species which are absent in the judgment of the Court but may allow an evolutive interpretation of the ICRW.
