National People's Congress Standing Research Articles

Research on the System of Interpretation of the Basic Law of Hong Kong

The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China (PRC) is implemented within the framework of the law rule, which is closely related to the Basic Law interpretation mechanism. It is stipulated in the Basic Law that the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC) has the authority of interpretation, and the Standing Committee of the NPC authorizes Hong Kong (HK) courts to have the power of interpretation when trying cases. Under the "One Country, Two Systems" policy, the common law goes on to be adopted in HK according to the Basic Law provisions. Therefore, that Law combines the background of the socialist law mechanism with Chinese features as well as the common law mechanism. The interaction and coordination between the two is an important issue in its implementation. This paper provides an overview of HK Basic Law interpretation system, and provides an overall review of the five interpretations of the National People's Congress Standing Committee since the construction of HK Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). It analyzes differences in legal interpretation rules between the two regions, and explores the connection and coordination between the two interpretation mechanisms of the NPC Standing Committee and HK courts.

Investigating the Impact and New Opportunities of Policy on the Development of Agricultural Cooperatives in China

The 31st session of the 12th National People's Congress Standing Committee passed the revised "Law of the People's Republic of China on Farmers' Professional Cooperatives" which came into effect on July 1, 2018. This law has introduced a series of supportive policies to promote the standardization and optimization of the cooperative environment. It has positive implications for the agricultural development in various provinces. This paper takes the cooperative as a unit of analysis, and explores the development of agriculture from both macro and micro perspectives in an integrated manner.

United States Terminates Hong Kong's Special Status Due to National Security Law Imposed by Beijing

In June 2019, protests erupted in Hong Kong after its government proposed an extradition agreement with mainland China. Alarmed by the protests, the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party announced that it would consider new national security measures for Hong Kong. On June 30, 2020, China's National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) passed the “Law of the People's Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.” While the law was under consideration, the United States responded by declaring that Hong Kong was no longer significantly autonomous from mainland China and beginning the process of ending Hong Kong's special status under U.S. law. The United States and its allies continue to criticize Hong Kong's deteriorating autonomy from China, pointing to the postponement of elections in Hong Kong as further evidence.

Development of Maritime Law in China Within the Last Five Years: Maritime Legislation, Cases and Jurisdiction

This paper examines the development of maritime law in China within the last five years, from the perspective of China's maritime legislations, cases and jurisdiction of the court, in light of the latest national strategies, such as building China into a maritime power, implementing the "Belt and Road" initiative and building China into an international shipping hub. Chinese maritime law is anticipating a reform. China has implemented various maritime-related laws and regulations in recent years, including the <i>2014 Waterway Law</i>. Besides, the 12th National People's Congress Standing Committee has formally ratified the International Labour Organization's <i>2006 Maritime Labor Convention</i> at its 16th meeting on August 29th, 2015. The Supreme People's Court has released ten maritime model cases in the conference celebrating the 30th anniversary of establishing maritime court in China. These model cases offer valuable guidance to maritime trials in the future. To improve the maritime adjudication and to turn China into a judicial hub for international maritime matters, China has undertaken reform to confer maritime court with jurisdiction to hold criminal hearings. Ningbo Maritime Court held a public court hearing over the case of "Catalina". It was the first criminal hearing in the maritime court of China. New elements of reform on criminal jurisdiction were also demonstrated in the trial of the case. Another important measure taken to perfect the admiralty jurisdiction in China is the regular publication of White Papers on maritime issues. These White Papers have summarized and highlighted some of the important maritime trials by the Maritime Courts in recent years. Meanwhile, the Supreme People's Court has issued the <i>Notice of the Supreme People's Court on Issuing the Provisions on Case Guidance</i>, which has made specific provisions on the guiding cases. Amongst the guiding cases released, some of them are relate to maritime matter.

D.2 10th National People's Congress Standing Committee “Decision on Authorizing the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to Implement Jurisdiction over the Hong Kong Port Area of the Shenzhen Bay Port” 31 October 2006, “State Council Communique” 2006 No. 35.

"D.2 10th National People's Congress Standing Committee “Decision on Authorizing the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to Implement Jurisdiction over the Hong Kong Port Area of the Shenzhen Bay Port” 31 October 2006, “State Council Communique” 2006 No. 35.." Chinese Law & Government, 50(3-4), p. 183

A.2 National People's Congress Standing Committee Resolution on Authorizing the People's Congresses of Guangdong Province and Fujian Province and Their Standing Committees to Formulate All Individual Economic Regulations in Their Respective Special Economic Zones

"A.2 National People's Congress Standing Committee Resolution on Authorizing the People's Congresses of Guangdong Province and Fujian Province and Their Standing Committees to Formulate All Individual Economic Regulations in Their Respective Special Economic Zones." Chinese Law & Government, 50(3-4), p. 206

English in Hong Kong

As 2016 Draws to a Close, the Most Hotly Debated Topic in Hong Kong is the Controversial Behavior of Two Newly elected legislators of a localist political party during their oath taking at the Legislative Council earlier this year. The proindependence advocates roused anger among mainland Chinese and local Hong Kong officials and citizens alike when they declared allegiance to the “Hong Kong nation” and pronounced “China” in a way that painfully echoed for many the derogatory pronunciation used by the Japanese forces that occupied Hong Kong in World War II. Ironically, in their attempts to lobby for the Hong Kong people's interests and right to self-determination, the legislators were accused of ignoring Hong Kong's history and disrespecting those who had perished during or survived those dark days. Subsequently, China's National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) issued an interpretation of Hong Kong's Basic Law that disqualified the pair from government service and preempted any ruling by a local Hong Kong court. This decision prompted thirteen thousand Hong Kong people to take to the streets in protest against what is widely perceived as the mainland's tightening of control over its special administrative region.

Constitutional Competition Between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal and the Chinese National People's Congress Standing Committee: A Game Theory Perspective

The competition between the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, a cosmopolitan common law supreme court, and the Chinese National People's Congress Standing Committee, a Leninist parliamentary body, over the “proper meaning” of the Hong Kong Basic Law constituted a very important facet of the territory's constitutional history since the end of British rule in 1997. This article applies the insights of game theory to explain why constitutional stability, in the sense that the two players have never entered into an open collision with each other despite the ambiguity of the Basic Law and the “One Country, Two Systems” formula, endured until the present day. It is argued that successful coordination between the two resulted from the strong aversion of the Court and the Standing Committee to constitutional crises, as well as from the fact that neither entity was capable of credibly signaling its commitment to an aggressive strategy all the time.

Interpreting the Basic Law and the Adjudication of Politically Sensitive Questions

AbstractIn this paper, I shall essentially lay out five interpretive principles that the Hong Kong judiciary should observe. First, the Hong Kong judiciary can disable themselves from giving effect to National People's Congress (NPC) Acts that are inconsistent with the Basic Law. Second, the Court of Final Appeal has a duty to make a reference to the NPC's Standing Committee (NPCSC) when it needs to adjudicate over two conflicting Basic Law provisions, one whose affairs fall within the Central Government's concerns and the other which falls within the limits of Hong Kong's autonomy. Third, in reading the text of the NPCSC Interpretation narrowly while observing its central tenor, the Court would be respecting the plenary interpretive mandate conferred on the NPCSC while retaining its role as the primary interpreter of the Basic Law. Fourth, so far as a Mainland National Law has been formally incorporated into the Basic Law, it cannot be deemed in violation of another constitutional clause. Finally, I would argue that not all constitutional affairs falling within the limits of Hong Kong's autonomy are automatically justiciable; where there is a textual commitment to a coordinate branch of government, the Court may only interfere with the decisions made by the political branches on traditional grounds of judicial review, i.e. illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety.

10 Years of the Basic Law: The Rise, Retreat and Resurgence of Judicial Power in Hong Kong

Since the National People's Congress Standing Committee's (NPCSC) reversal of the Court of Final Appeal's abrasive decision of Ng Ka Ling, the court has become cognizant of the repercussions of its decisions and has now adopted a pragmatic view toward its adjudicatory role. Where decisions implicate the validity of Mainland Chinese laws or NPCSC decisions, the court would always defer to the central government. Notwithstanding the court's recognition of the supremacy of the NPCSC, the court has remained very diligent in preserving its prerogative as the primary interpreter of the Basic Law. Where disputes concern alleged human rights violations that have no People's Republic of China (PRC) implications but have law and order implications in Hong Kong, the courts are generally conservative so as to afford the legislature or the executive much latitude in maintaining peace and stability. With regard to disputes with neither NPCSC nor domestic law and order implications, the court is confident that any political backlash against an adverse decision would be minimal; in these instances, the court is therefore more conscious of avoiding the austerity of tabulated legalism and is enthused about providing a generous interpretation of the Basic Law.

David v. Goliath: The Hong Kong Courts and China's National People's Congress Standing Committee

David v. Goliath: The Hong Kong Courts and China's National People's Congress Standing Committee

"Apres Moi Le Deluge"? Judicial Review in Hong Kong Since Britain Relinquished Sovereignty

"Apres Moi Le Deluge"? Judicial Review in Hong Kong Since Britain Relinquished Sovereignty

The Politics of the Debate over the Court of Final Appeal in Hong Kong

Before the transfer of Hong Kong's sovereignty from Britain to the People's Republic of China (PRC) on 1 July 1997, the politics of interpreting the Basic Law had already become apparent. This article aims to use the debate over the Court of Final Appeal (COFA), which was set up in July 1997 to replace the Privy Council in Britain as the court of final adjudication in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), to analyse how the Basic Law had already been interpreted by PRC officials, their British counterparts and the Hong Kong people. The interpretation of the Basic Law involves many people from both Hong Kong and China. As one legal scholar writes: “In one sense all kinds of people [in the HKSAR] will have to interpret the Basic Law: civil servants and other administrators and lawyers in their day-today work, legislators to ensure that their legislation and motions are consistent with it, the State Council [in the PRC], the National People's Congress Standing Committee, even private parties since some provisions affect private acts.” The debate over the COFA may also help towards an understanding of the ongoing interpretation of various provisions of the Basic Law, which serves as the mini-constitution of the HKSAR.

The 1990 Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China

THE 1990 COPYRIGHT LAW OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA Yiping Yangt I. INTRODUCTION Since the adoption of the open-door policy at the end of the 1970s, China has felt strong pressure from Western nations, the United States in particular, to enact more protective intellectual property laws. The Chinese Government responded by passing the Trademark Law in 1982 and the Patent Law in 1984. Further, the long-awaited Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (the Copyright Law ) was adopted by the 15th Session of the Seventh National People's Congress Standing Committee on September 7, 1990,1 and went into force on June 1, 1991.2 However, the promulgation of the Copyright Law did not sat- isfy many Western nations, as evidenced by episodes of diplomatic conflict between Washington and Beijing soon after its enactment. In April 1991 the United States Trade Representative (USTR) placed China on the Special 301 priority watch list ' 3 (together t LL.M., 1993, U.C. Berkeley School of Law; J.D., 1992, University of Maine School of Law; B.A., 1982, Hangzhou University, People's Republic of China. This paper was submitted to the 1992 Nathan Burkan Memorial Competition sponsored by the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers. The author would like to thank Professor David D. Gregory of the University of Maine School of Law for his guidance and encouragement, and Thomas French, reference librarian, for his assistance. 1. China's Copyright Law, BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, Sept. 11, 1990, available in LEXIS, Nexis Library, NEWS File. 2. Beijing Newspaper Highlights, Xinhua General Overseas News Service, May 3 1, 1991, available in LEXIS, Nexis Library, NEWS File. 3. Special 301 is a provision of the U.S. Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act that aims to protect American intellectual property rights in foreign countries with whom the U.S. has trade agreements. Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, § 301, 19 U.S.C. §§ 2242 (a)(l), 2411 (1988). As one commentator states: Under the 'Special 301' provision ..., failure to provide adequate and effective protection for [American] intellectual property rights consti- tutes an unreasonable trade practice. The [A]ct requires the [United States Trade Representative (USTR)] to identify countries engaging in such practices or denying fair and equitable market access to [American] companies that rely on intellectual property protection. Countries so identified are designated 'priority countries.'

Representation without democratization: The “signature incident” and China's National People's Congress

This essay provides an analysis of China's National People's Congress (NPC) as a key institution in China's transition from an authoritarian regime to a pluralist political system. Using the revealing incident of Hu Jiwei's attempt to force a meeting of the NPC Standing Committee as a model of possible future interaction between the NPC and the CCP, the author hypothesizes that the NPC may serve as a major site for bringing about significant political change. It provides a new perspective on the NPC by adopting an institutional‐functional approach. Specially, the author tries to explain the function and strength of the legislature as an implanted Western institution in China's context by looking into how its essentially democratic core‐representation, which, to simplify gross, was dismissed by previous researchers as only existed in “sociological” terms, survived through adapting into Chinese own tradition and political infrastructure.

Report to the National People's Congress on the Forestry Law Revision

Zhang Youyu, vice-director of the Law Committee of the National People's Congress, reported to the seventh session of the Sixth National People's Congress Standing Committee on the result of discussions on the Forestry Law of the People's Republic of China (revised draft) on the afternoon of September 11.