Criminal law interpretation in China faces two primary challenges in terms of value judgments. Normative interpretations often fall into circular and inadequate reasoning, while judges, the key figures in applying int...Criminal law interpretation in China faces two primary challenges in terms of value judgments. Normative interpretations often fall into circular and inadequate reasoning, while judges, the key figures in applying interpretive principles, frequently lack the necessary value judgment engagement and proficiency. Traditional criminal law interpretation is ensnared in a subjective-objective dichotomy, resulting in a misalignment with the aim of "legitimate and rational" interpretation practices in China. To rectify this, a philosophical shift is required to allow intersubjective value judgments while maintaining subjectivityobjectivity as the prerequisite. Criminal law interpretation ensures the completeness of value judgments through a combination of specialized knowledge and public discourse.This involves the creation of systematic criteria for value judgments and adherence to legal principles. The former necessitates defining the internal and external standards of value judgments, formulating rules for the resolution of conflicting standards, and underlining the practical importance of criminalization under law, or "no crime or punishment without law"(the principle that only the law can define a crime and prescribe a penalty) and "Where no law applies, it is permissible to redefine a crime as non-criminal or minor"(decriminalization).The latter involves three perspectives: logical reasoning and theoretical arguments;positive and negative judgments;and formal and substantive rationality. Moreover, it should be approached from four dimensions: normative orientation, individual case promotion, reverse exclusion, and constitutional guidance.展开更多
The Supreme People’s Court of China recently made public the latest interpretation on applying the Marriage Law, which is meant to provide a judicial basis for courts.The interpretation consists of 19 new itemsand is...The Supreme People’s Court of China recently made public the latest interpretation on applying the Marriage Law, which is meant to provide a judicial basis for courts.The interpretation consists of 19 new itemsand is valid from August 13 this year.展开更多
This paper offers an analysis of the approaches employed in the three interpretations of the Basic Law of the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong by the Standing Committee of the National People＇s Congress （...This paper offers an analysis of the approaches employed in the three interpretations of the Basic Law of the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong by the Standing Committee of the National People＇s Congress （NPC） after the return of Hong Kong to China, including textualism, structural reading and originalism. The paper stresses the application of jurisprudential theory in the skilful employment of these methods in the NPC interpretations. In the case of ＂the right of abode＂ in Hong Kong the differences between the interpretations by the Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong and by the NPC rest mainly in whether a formalist procedural review or a substantivist presumption of intent should be adopted in the process of determining an authoritative text that embodies the original intention of the legislation. That is not just a difference of legal interpretation but also one of jurisprudential theory and political stance. Based on the above considerations, this paper criticizes the common misconception that it is not appropriate for legislators to undertake legal interpretation, and calls for an understanding of the Basic Law in the framework of Chinese constitutional government.展开更多
文摘Criminal law interpretation in China faces two primary challenges in terms of value judgments. Normative interpretations often fall into circular and inadequate reasoning, while judges, the key figures in applying interpretive principles, frequently lack the necessary value judgment engagement and proficiency. Traditional criminal law interpretation is ensnared in a subjective-objective dichotomy, resulting in a misalignment with the aim of "legitimate and rational" interpretation practices in China. To rectify this, a philosophical shift is required to allow intersubjective value judgments while maintaining subjectivityobjectivity as the prerequisite. Criminal law interpretation ensures the completeness of value judgments through a combination of specialized knowledge and public discourse.This involves the creation of systematic criteria for value judgments and adherence to legal principles. The former necessitates defining the internal and external standards of value judgments, formulating rules for the resolution of conflicting standards, and underlining the practical importance of criminalization under law, or "no crime or punishment without law"(the principle that only the law can define a crime and prescribe a penalty) and "Where no law applies, it is permissible to redefine a crime as non-criminal or minor"(decriminalization).The latter involves three perspectives: logical reasoning and theoretical arguments;positive and negative judgments;and formal and substantive rationality. Moreover, it should be approached from four dimensions: normative orientation, individual case promotion, reverse exclusion, and constitutional guidance.
文摘The Supreme People’s Court of China recently made public the latest interpretation on applying the Marriage Law, which is meant to provide a judicial basis for courts.The interpretation consists of 19 new itemsand is valid from August 13 this year.
文摘This paper offers an analysis of the approaches employed in the three interpretations of the Basic Law of the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong by the Standing Committee of the National People＇s Congress （NPC） after the return of Hong Kong to China, including textualism, structural reading and originalism. The paper stresses the application of jurisprudential theory in the skilful employment of these methods in the NPC interpretations. In the case of ＂the right of abode＂ in Hong Kong the differences between the interpretations by the Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong and by the NPC rest mainly in whether a formalist procedural review or a substantivist presumption of intent should be adopted in the process of determining an authoritative text that embodies the original intention of the legislation. That is not just a difference of legal interpretation but also one of jurisprudential theory and political stance. Based on the above considerations, this paper criticizes the common misconception that it is not appropriate for legislators to undertake legal interpretation, and calls for an understanding of the Basic Law in the framework of Chinese constitutional government.
