Chinese “Law”

Excerpt from Stanley Lubman “…there seems little prospect that the position of the courts vis-à-vis the CCP and the organs of the bureaucracy will soon be elevated; indeed, in the reform program the importance of Party leadership and supervision of the courts by local people’s congresses is underlined. There remains a tension between the conceptions of judges as loyal servants of the Party-state and as independent adjudicators, and the Party leadership has been reluctant to strengthen the autonomy of the courts. Foreign businesses have rightly sought to avoid litigating disputes in Chinese courts. The most likely alternative within China is arbitration at CIETAC which, although it has enjoyed a good reputation in the past, has recently been cogently criticized.65 Local arbitration commissions, established nationwide in recent years, provide another alternative, although little has been reported about the experience of foreign companies in those forums. C. Lawyers China’s law schools, already politicized by the late 1950s, were closed at the beginning of the Cultural Revolution and were the last educational institutions to reopen, in 1979. Today, hundreds of schools grant bachelor’s degrees in law and almost a hundred award doctorates as well. Unfortunately, legal education emphasizes the study of abstract legal concepts imported from abroad and memorization of legal rules rather than critical thought about those concepts and rules.”