Several Controversial Issues on Judicial Review of Foreign-Related Arbitration in China: From the Perspective of the Amendment to the Arbitration Law

With the continuous development of China's market economic system,the arbitration judicial review system based on the Arbitration Law promulgated in 1994,including the dual-track review of foreign-related and domestic cases,and the dual-supervision on procedural and substantive matters,has shown some issues that need to be studied and solved in practice.On July 30,2021,the Ministry of Justice officially announced the Arbitration Law of the People's Republic of China(Amendment)(Draft for Comment),which unified the provisions on setting aside domestic and foreign-related arbitrament,and partially revised the scope of judicial review.However,heated debate arose and many problems remained unsolved such as the setting of the scope of supervision on foreign-related arbitration cases,how to grasp the principles of procedural review,and how to place the substantive supervision after the dual-track systems were changed into unified ones.Based on the Draft for Comments,this paper analyzes several prominent issues at present,and puts forward suggestions such as expanding the criteria for identifying foreign-related factors,converging to the original supervision scope of foreign-related arbitration,adhering to the principle of procedural review,and permitting the parties concerned to agree on the scope of supervision to maximize respect for the autonomy of the will of parties,so as to build a judicial supervision mechanism for commercial arbitration betterfitting into the era.

Rights and Disagreement

Constitutionally protected rights remove political issues from the control of the democratically elected legislature. Since such rights therefore limit the power of the majority, recent work in rights theory argues that the constitutional protection of rights is inconsistent with the fundamental democratic idea of government by the people. According to this view, democracies should assign the power to resolve questions regarding the nature and extent of individual rights to the majority. Constitutional attempts to remove such questions from the public agenda, it is argued, are disrespectful to citizens who disagree with the views embodied in the constitutionalized rights. I argue that this critique： （1） is insufficiently attentive to the question of when legislation by the majority constitutes a legitimate exercise of political power; and （2） underestimates the importance of securing the constitutive conditions of democratic self-government.

Empirical study on the evidence-based medicine in court of China

Evidence-based medicine(EBM)is recognized as one of the highest-quality scientific approaches in the medical community around the globe.It calls for doctors to use the best available scientific evidence in clinical decision-making.This paper used an empirical study on 44 EBM related judicial cases in China,the result shows the EBM is commonly used as a supplement to the expert opinion in actual judicial review,it is deemed to illuminate the causation in the case fact rather than as the standards of care,which has the similar characteristics as"documentary evidence",and over the years the Chinese judicial practice formed a"three-stage"judicial review rule on EBM:(1)the first stage is whether the evidence itself can meet the standards of EBM;(2)the second stage is when determining the evidence presented by parties is sufficient to meet the legal standards of EBM,and whether it can be applied in a court case would depend upon comprehensive consideration of adaptability and maturity of EBM;(3)the third stage is whether to treat EBM as the only basis in causation analysis.