In recent years the cases of blog infringement are on the increase, attracting more attention from all walks of life. The author provides a preliminary discussion on the status, elements, and judicial finding of blog infringement, as well as civil liabilities for blog infringement, in the hope of contributing to the research and legislative regulation of blog infringement.

The Communist Party of China (CPC) has created a new path for Chinese modernization and a new form of human civilization while leading the people in advancing a great social transformation. Chinese modernization of the rule of law is an integral part of this new path. With a high degree of historical initiative and consciousness, the CPC has solidly grasped the basic regularity of China’s legal development based on actual national conditions, and has successfully pioneered, upheld, and expanded Chinese modernization of the rule of law. Legal construction during the New-Democratic Revolution has reflected the early exploration of Chinese modernization of the rule of law. The development of the rule of law during the period of socialist revolution and construction has laid a preliminary foundation for the formation of Chinese modernization of the rule of law. The new great social transformation of reform and opening up has further promoted such modernization. The construction of a law-based China in the new era of socialism with Chinese characteristics marks a further expansion and deepening of modernization. Therefore, Chinese modernization of the rule of law is rooted in the Chinese land, conforms to the characteristics of China, and draws on the excellent achievements of the world’s legal civilization. It encapsulates profound historical, theoretical, and practical logic, and has created a new model of modernization of the rule of law in a civilized society.

The family system has always been effective in maintaining basic social order at the grassroots level in traditional Chinese society. At the beginning of the 20th century, Chinese society underwent tremendous changes, and traditional Chinese law was modernized; the family system became the most contested point of conflict between tradition and modernity, forcing lawmakers to be particularly cautious in making legal modernization. During the modern period, the political power struggles of various warlords led to chaos and disorder across the entire social legal system, yet legislative construction never ceased, and the legal modernization of traditional family systems became the focus of legislative endeavors for maintaining basic social order.

In traditional Chinese law, cases are the judicial decisions of general effects determined by special procedures. Before the Period of Spring and Autumn and Warring States, the main form of Chinese law was cases. After that period, Chinese legal system had gradually accommodated various forms in coexistence, with codes as the main body but cases as supplementary. Such a system maintained for a long time. Those cases in the codification era were based on codes and functioned to broaden the scope of legislation, supplement the legislative techniques and strengthen the effect of rules. As to the relationship between the establishment rule and the recurring rule of cases, ancient Chinese law persisted in the recurring rule and thus it maintained a relatively steady supply of rules while maintaining an inner stable legal forms.

The Chinese have created the concept of “humanity, reason and law” and developed a mentality around it. Since Confucianism was highly valued in the Han Dynasty, especially during the Han, Wei, and Six Dynasties periods, the exploration and analysis of “humanity and reason” in judicial practice has been widespread. This has led to the “filtering” and examination of laws based on “humanity and reason.” The objective aspect of “humanity” refers to the facts and circumstances of a case, extending to the latent emotions of the people involved. Confucian scholars proposed the principle of “judging a case based on its original sentiments and emotions.” The subjective aspect of “humanity” refers to sentiment and emotion, such as the “willingness” or “unwillingness” of both parties in a divorce case. The combination of the objective and subjective aspects of “humanity” together with their “reason” form the essence of “humanity, reason and law” and is the main content of this concept. “Humanity, reason and law” serves as both a principle of legal formulation and a method of application and interpretation. In modern times, SHEN Jiaben and XIE Juezai were pivotal in the development of “humanity, reason and law” mentality. SHEN Jiaben facilitated the transition from tradition to modernity, while XIE Juezai integrated ancient and excellent traditions into revolutionary legal practices, giving it a modern significance.

Western scholars have argued that image making and image management are a preoccupation of the judiciary. Images of the judiciary may take a variety of forms and be produced for kinds of audiences. One form of judicial image making and image management is live performances in the courtroom and other court settings. Another is the written judgment where the preoccupation is the style of the written text. Press and other mass media reports of judicial activity are another. The audience for judicial images is equally diverse, from fellow judges, lawyers in the courts and the wider legal community, the litigants before the courts to the executive, legislature and the public both in the courtroom and beyond. The image of the judiciary that is available to the public has a particular significance in Western rule of law democracies. As a general rule courts and the judiciary are required to operate in public and their activities must be open to public scrutiny. A recent policy manifestation of this goal is debated about confidence in the justice system and initiatives designed to improve confidence. In the majority of cases public scrutiny of judicial activity and public confidence in the judiciary relies upon the media. Objective and accurate press and media reports play a key role in shaping public understanding of the judiciary and generating or undermining confidence in that institution. Reports in regional and national newspapers have long been an important source of information, shaping public knowledge and facilitating public scrutiny of the justice system. In the UK, there is almost no scholarship on these representations past or present. The result is little known about the representation of the courts and the judiciary in press reports. Little is known about what the diligent reader of these reports can learn about judicial activity. The aim of this article is to take a first step towards changing that state of affairs. It uses a data set made up of 205 contemporary domestic newspaper reports of court and judicial activity. These come from a sample of 24 daily newspapers: 10 national newspapers and 14 from the regions. All were published on Thursday 16th February 2012, an unexceptional day in the life of the justice system and the press. The modest goal of this article is to offer an analysis of this snapshot of judicial activity in the press in England and Wales. The article concludes with some reflections on the significance of the findings of this study for our understanding of the role of the press in enabling public scrutiny of the judiciary.

The mode of deferential review on directors’ management decisions coincides with the requirements of adaptive efficiency, being conducive to encouraging directors’ tentative experiments. However, under the rule of business judgment, directors’ accountability requires for onerous burden of proof on the plaintiff, and the formal review of directors’ decisions and the uncertainty of the standard of care have rendered the duty of care almost an empty shell, and consequently the unfaithful conducts of directors between gross negligence and malice are always at large. The good faith path is not only a mechanism to fill the gap of accountability but an important mechanism to overcome the information asymmetry between shareholders and directors. The judicial practice of directors’ accountability in the 1990s produced a good faith path, and the good faith concept has been rejuvenated with creative changes, the standards of conducts become clear with the increasing operability of judicial reviews. In China, the standards on fiduciary conducts can be defined by the judicial interpretation of the Company Law, so as to incorporate such misconducts as intentionally causing the violation of law by company, failure to disclose candidly, abuse of power and gross disregard of responsibilities, hence inducing the good faith path to accountability.

Cross-border data flows not only involve cross-border trade issues, but also severely challenge personal information protection, national data security, and the jurisdiction of justice and enforcement. As the current digital trade negotiations could not accommodate these challenges, China has initiated the concept of secure cross-border data flow and has launched a dual-track multi-level regulatory system, including control system for overseas transfer of important data, system of crossborder provision of personal information, and system of cross-border data request for justice and enforcement. To explore a global regulatory framework for cross-border data flows, legitimate and controllable cross-border data flows should be promoted, supervision should be categorized based on risk concerned, and the rule of law should be coordinated at home and abroad to promote system compatibility. To this end, the key is to build a compatible regulatory framework, which includes clarifying the scope of important data to define the “Negative List” for preventing national security risks, improving the cross-border accountability for protecting personal information rights and interests to ease pre-supervision pressure, and focusing on data access rights instead of data localization for upholding the jurisdiction of justice and enforcement.

In the age of artificial intelligence (AI), robots have profoundly impacted our life and work, and have challenged our civil legal system. In the course of AI development, robots need to be designed to protect our personal privacy, data privacy, intellectual property rights, and tort liability identification and determination. In addition, China needs an updated Civil Code in line with the growth of AI. All measures should aim to address AI challenges and also to provide the needed institutional space for the development of AI and other emerging technologies.

This paper analyzes the origin of Chinese legalism, its major propositions and characteristics. It compares the difference between Chinese legalism and other Chinese philosophies including Confucianism, Taoism and Mohism. It also discloses the difference of Chinese legalism and Western legalism in relation with morality. Western legalism defended the rule-of-law but argued against the morality of law. In contrast, Chinese legalism, especially in the early Pre-Qin era, did not separate morality from law. However, the fidelity to law in Chinese legalism was interpreted as the fidelity to the monarch, and thus being different from the Western rule-of-law.

The Anti-Monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China has provided to prohibit monopoly agreements and abuse of dominant market position, control concentration of business operators and fight against administrative monopoly. The transformation of China’s economic system is incomplete, and the Anti-Monopoly Law has many flaws. At the initial stage of enforcing the Anti-Monopoly Law, severe challenges will occur in legislative purposes, enforcement authorities, fighting against administrative monopoly and handling of the relationship between anti-monopoly enforcement and industry supervision. Thus, the promulgation of the Anti-Monopoly Law is only the first step in the legislation on anti-monopoly.

With the development of the internet and the increasing role played by information technology in the economy, personal information protection has become one of the most significant legal and public policy problems. Since 2013, China has accelerated its legislation efforts towards protecting personal information. The Cybersecurity Law of the People’s Republic of China took effect on June 1, 2017. Legal scholars focus on the nature of personal information, discuss the necessity of enacting specific laws on protecting personal information, and attempt to propose relevant draft laws regarding personal information protection. Personal information protection, however, is not only a legal issue but also a political one. We need to look at the decision-making process about legislation on personal information protection in China. Why has China sped up its legislation on personal information protection since 2013? Is privacy, civil rights, or legal interest the main reason behind the legislation? Only after placing personal information protection legislation in a broader context, can we have a better understanding of the underlying logic and dynamics of personal information protection in China, and can perceive the potential content and possible future of these legislation. This paper argues that Internet industry development, the social consequences of personal information infringement, and national security are the main drivers of China’s personal information protection legislation.

The 5000-years uninterrupted Chinese legal culture embodies the political and legal wisdom of the Chinese nation and is a source of pride for the Chinese nation. It has provided extremely rich resources and treasures for the construction of socialist rule of law with Chinese characteristics. It has been inherited vertically, evolved intergenerationally and reserved continuously. Originating from both the historical legal system and from Marxist historical materialism, the Chinese legal system has profoundly influenced neighboring countries. The comprehensive governance of politics, law, and morality in ancient China, as reflected in the Rites of Zhou, a book of the Western Zhou Dynasty (1027-771 BC) on cultural ideology and political structure, provides an early work on the governance of ancient China. Chinese legal culture has remained progressive, and with the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, it is now important to promote Chinese legal culture for construction of the Chinese legal system in the new era.

As an important accomplishment of self-governance exploration for the Chinese nation, the Chinese legal system has contributed significantly to human rule-of-law civilization, and should be reinterpreted from three dimensions: historical tradition, prevailing practice, and future development. Following the constant logic of rule-of-law development in China, Chinese rule-of-law modernization marks a new era of the Chinese legal system and is a specific embodiment of Chinese modernization in the domain of rule of law. The Communist Party of China (CPC) has explored the China’s socialist rule-of-law practice with Chinese characteristics, carried forward the essence of fine Chinese rule-of-law culture, and learned from others’ important rule of-law achievements, modernizing the rule of law for the needs of China. Furthermore, XI Jinping Thought on the Rule of Law, adapting to the times to promote the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, understands and grasps the basic laws of national governance, the laws of socialist rule-of-law building and the principles of law-based humane civilization development. The Chinese legal system has thereby been revised and expanded through linking history with reality, the international scene with the domestic one, and theory with practice. Surely, the updated Chinese legal system with China characteristics and with world significance will return to global centre-stage in rule-of-law development. Also, the updated Chinese legal system in the new era will embrace the revival of Chinese rule-of-law civilization, while the Chinese rule-of-law modernization will advance the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.

The conflict of laws of Hong Kong has predominately preserved traditional common law rules of pre-England conflict of laws. It is considered as the legal basis of the harmonization of law conflicts between different legal units, which mainly include three parts: jurisdiction, choice of law, judicial assistance in civil and commercial matters. As far as the legal source of the conflict of laws of Hong Kong is concerned, convention is an important part of international law sources. Currently, there are ten special conventions related to private international law, one of which is the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, and the other nine are the conventions consulted by the Hague Conference on Private International Law (“HCCH”), including the Statute of the Hague Conference. Also, there exist non-special conventions relating to private international law, which play an important role in Hong Kong. These conventions have brought tremendous benefits to Hong Kong. More attention needs to be paid to the conventions of private international law to assist Hong Kong in cooperation with other more jurisdictions.

The UK’s position as a leading international financial center depends not only on the openness and competitiveness of its market, but also on its reputation as a clean and fair place to do business. Market confidence will be undermined where participants and users believe markets are susceptible to abuse. Thus, the main convincing justification for controlling insider’s abuse of power is based on the harm principle, which it causes to investor confidence and securities markets. An insider ought not to be able to take advantage of his position either to breach a confidence or to achieve an unfair advantage in the market place; particularly the market place should, as far as possible, provide equality of opportunity to people entering it. Insider dealing has been regulated by the criminal law involved under Part V of the Criminal Justice Act 1993 in the UK. It has become clear that the traditional criminal penalty was limited by the criminal standard of proof required, while self-regulatory regimes are thought as toothless tigers. Although various potential common law civil remedies for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of confidence relating to insider dealing do exist, they are ineffective remedies and beset by so many complexities. As a response, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 came into force and marked an important development in the regulation of market abuse in creating civil penalties, which also contained misuse of confidential insider information. Later, the main substantive changes to existing civil market abuse regime have been taken effect within the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Market Abuse) Regulations 2005, 2011 and 2014. Regarding to the regulatory framework, the range of regulatory powers of the Financial Services Authority, which has been replaced by the Financial Conduct Authority in April 1, 2013, available in combating market abuse is one of the most fundamental innovations of the FSMA 2000 and plays a significant role in defining the law in practice through a Code of Market Conduct. China has also exerted great efforts in regulating insider dealing. Under the current Chinese legal framework, insider dealing is governed by the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Securities Law of the People’s Republic of China 2005 and some other regulations. The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) is the regulatory body for supervising and penalizing insider dealing in China. Although China has made progress in legislation in terms of the regulation of insider dealing, there are still much room for improvement, such as the enforcement of the civil penalty and the enforcement power of the CSRC. Due to the fact that the UK has rich experience in regulating insider dealing, it is of great significance for China to learn from the UK’s successful practices. Insider dealing could be well controlled with innovative and effective legal regulations. This article focuses on an in-depth examination on the regulations in the UK and a brief introduction of regulations in China in order to figure out an answer to what has been achieved in the UK and what are the most important aspects that China could learn from the UK’s experiences. The aim of increasing the deterrent effect by reducing the obstacles to imposing suitable sanctions, whether criminal, civil or regulatory, should enable regulators to police a more efficient manner in the field of financial markets.

Little scholarly work has been done on understanding Taizong’s (one of China’s most influential emperors) legal thought. Existing historiography has been descriptive and has not fully contextualized Taizong’s legal thought in his broader political thought. Furthermore, it has been influenced by the traditional bias in Tang historiography as a whole, which has been adulatory toward Taizong’s reign. Drawing from a variety of sources, including dynastic histories and Taizong’s writings, this article seeks to complicate the existing historiography. It lays out key characteristics of Taizong’s legal thought, situating them in the historical context in which Taizong operated, as well as contextualizing them within his broader political thought, to present a more balanced analysis. It will argue that Taizong was an emperor who was concerned with legality, competent legal administration, and leniency in punishments. His actions and rhetoric also suggest that he believed that law should be applied to the emperor’s conduct as well. At the same time, this article also argues that Taizong should not be viewed primarily as an innovative legal thinker or as someone with an ideological or idealistic commitment to legal reform for its own sake. Rather, he was a man whose views on law were greatly motivated by practical, political concerns, such as concerns regarding the stability and legitimacy of his rule. More broadly, this article contributes to the historiography of traditional Chinese legal history by complicating the so-called dominant narrative of the process of “Confucianization of law” in premodern Chinese history by highlighting the role that specific historical actors (such as Taizong) played in that process.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people constitute approximately five percent of the population, but workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity remains troublingly commonplace. This article summarizes a large and growing body of social science research demonstrating the economic benefits of LGBT inclusion (and the costs of LGBT exclusion) in the workplace. It concludes with recommendations for (1) future research, stressing the need for more China-specific studies, which would inform policymaking and theoretical understanding of diversity and inclusion practices on business performance, (2) improving employer LGBT-inclusion policies, and (3) strengthening state protection of the equal employment rights of LGBT people.

The regulations of cross-border data flows is a growing challenge for the international community. International trade agreements, however, appear to be pioneering legal methods to cope, as they have grappled with this issue since the 1990s. The World Trade Organization (WTO) rules system offers a partial solution under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), which covers aspects related to cross-border data flows. The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) have also been perceived to provide forward-looking resolutions. In this context, this article analyzes why a resolution to this issue may be illusory. While they regulate cross-border data flows in various ways, the structure and wording of exception articles of both the CPTPP and USMCA have the potential to pose significant challenges to the international legal system. The new system, attempting to weigh societal values and economic development, is imbalanced, often valuing free trade more than individual online privacy and cybersecurity. Furthermore, the inclusion of poison-pill clauses is, by nature, antithetical to cooperation. Thus, for the international community generally, and China in particular, cross-border data flows would best be regulated under the WTO-centered multilateral trade law system.

Currently, research on the Chinese legal system is flourishing, and more and more issues are worthy of exploration. The Chinese legal system is unique among the five major legal systems in the world. It is the only ancient secular legal system, and the only ancient secular legal system to have been disseminated by non-coercive means. The openness of the Chinese legal system is a powerful proof that traditional Chinese law plays a role in importing and exporting legal policies and measures from and to other states. Indeed, these issues are important in research on the Chinese legal system, and a correct understanding of them can help to comprehensively understand traditional Chinese legal culture. It is essential to deepen the research on the Chinese legal system to contribute to its revival and to the inheritance of traditional Chinese legal culture. In addition to comprehensive discussions, it is also necessary to fill gaps and advance the research on the Chinese legal system.

Regulatory instruments in the form of normative documents has been used as a way to modernize Chinese society since the late 1970s. However, the conflict between laws undermines the effectiveness of such efforts. This article aims to answer the following questions in the process of law-making: How serious is the conflict of normative documents in China? Why there exists the conflict of normative documents? How the Legislation Law approaches the conflict of normative documents? What to be done to prevent the conflict of normative documents?

This article investigates what might be characterised as “the forensic challenge” for criminal adjudication and clarifies its nature and scope. The “challenge” identified is complex, dynamic and multifaceted, encompassing a variety of issues and debates concerning the ways in which forensic science evidence is validated, generated, presented, tested, evaluated and utilised in criminal proceedings. Common law evidentiary principles governing the admissibility of scientific evidence and expert witness testimony are reviewed and the underlying assumptions and potential weaknesses of adversarial trial procedure are critically considered. The discussion is pitched at the generic level of recurring intellectual puzzles, institutional design, regulatory frameworks, procedural structures and processes, macro-policy choices and methodological prescriptions, with the intention of making it relevant to an international audience. Aspects of the procedural law and adjudicative practice of England and Wales, and the regulatory context of UK forensic science, are offered as concrete illustrations with the potential for illuminating comparative extrapolation to other legal systems. In conclusion, the article draws out specific implications for Chinese scholarship, law reform and policymaking in relation to scientific and other expert evidence, and advances a bold suggestion for entertaining an unconventionally expansive conception of “forensic science” and, correspondingly, of the challenges it presents.

Considering the prevalence of online hate speech and its harm and risks to the targeted people, democratic discourse and public security, it is necessary to combat online hate speech. For this purpose, internet intermediaries play a crucial role as new governors of online speech. However, there is no universal definition of hate speech. Rules concerning this vary in different countries depending on their social, ethical, legal and religious backgrounds. The answer to the question of who can be liable for online hate speech also varies in different countries depending on the social, cultural, history, legal and political backgrounds. The First Amendment, cyberliberalism and the priority of promoting the emerging internet industry lead to the U.S. model, which offers intermediaries wide exemptions from liability for third-party illegal content. Conversely, the Chinese model of cyberpaternalism prefers to control online content on ideological, political and national security grounds through indirect methods, whereas the European Union (EU) and most European countries, including Germany, choose the middle ground to achieve balance between restricting online illegal hate speech and the freedom of speech as well as internet innovation. It is worth noting that there is a heated discussion on whether intermediary liability exemptions are still suitable for the world today, and there is a tendency in the EU to expand intermediary liability by imposing obligation on online platforms to tackle illegal hate speech. However, these reforms are again criticized as they could lead to erosion of the EU legal framework as well as privatization of law enforcement through algorithmic tools. Those critical issues relate to the central questions of whether intermediaries should be liable for user-generated illegal hate speech at all and, if so, how should they fulfill these liabilities? Based on the analysis of the different basic standpoints of cyberliberalists and cyberpaternalists on the internet regulation as well as the arguments of proponents and opponents of the intermediary liability exemptions, especially the debates over factual impracticality and legal restraints, impact on internet innovation and the chilling effect on freedom of speech in the case that intermediaries bear liabilities for illegal third-party content, the paper argues that the arguments for intermediary liability exemptions are not any more tenable or plausible in the web 3.0 era. The outdated intermediary immunity doctrine needs to be reformed and amended. Furthermore, intermediaries are becoming the new governors of online speech and platforms now have the power to curtail online hate speech. Thus, the attention should turn to the appropriate design of legal responsibilities of intermediaries. The possible suggestions could be the following three points: Imposing liability on intermediaries for illegal hate speech requires national law and international human rights norms as the outer boundary; openness, transparency and accountability as internal constraints; balance of multi-interests and involvement of multi-stakeholders in internet governance regime.

This paper rethinks the reasons for and the nature and means of personal data protection. The reasons for personal data protection are that it could promote the fairness and effectiveness of information flow, help individuals develop their independent personality, and equip them to deal with risks. With respect to the nature of personal data, this paper argues that such data should not be perceived from a purely individualistic point of view. Rather, there should be a contextualized understanding of the data, which considers the appropriate information flow of personal data within a particular context. Regarding the legal framework of personal data protection, this paper suggests that consumer protection law and public law are better equipped to protect personal data than tort, contract, or property law.

Facing the dilemma on the recourse for Chinese cultural relics pillaged overseas, China shall get a clear understanding of the international legal situation, strengthen international communication and promote international compromise. Based on this foundation, China shall take rational, beneficial, and moderate legal actions to uphold and protect national rights. The recourse on the ground of international custom has been deemed as a failure by the view of the majority; the recourse in a foreign court will almost certainly encounter numerous obstacles in law that are very difficult to deal with, and the recourse in a national court will not only achieve the expected goals but also raise considerable disadvantages. If China hopes to retrieve the pillaged cultural relics by means of international treaty, it is necessary for China to conclude special agreements with relative states. The latter shall exercise best efforts to recover the cultural relics and return them to China at the expense of Chinese tax payers. On the other hand, there are two choices available if China hopes to settle the problem through general principles of law: One is to make an agreement with relative states, and the other is to authorize certain international tribunals to adjudicate the case according to the general principles of law. If the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) is chosen, then the relative states can authorize the court to decide the case according to the principle of ex aequo et bono; however, the best way is to conclude an international arbitration agreement and renounce the application of certain general principles of law which might hinder the dispute resolutions. The other choice is to make unilateral legal activities with each other according to relative general principles of law, on condition that certain tacit agreement or understanding had been achieved between relative states. However, whether the above international legal methods can be used for the settlement of the problem, it depends on sufficient negotiation and mutual compromise between China and other relative states; the relative national authorities shall pay more attention to such aspects instead on unilateral declarations or sanctions.

This paper discusses the concept of burden of proof and prima facie case, respectively, in WTO dispute settlement based on the legal doctrine on burden of proof in Chinese law. From the perspective of Chinese law, the burden of proof has three implications on two levels, namely the behavior burden of production and the behavior burden of persuasion in the procedural sense, and the result burden of bearing unfavorable consequence in its substantive sense. A prima facie case also includes the weaker account and the stricter account. They do not mean the same in different contexts, but what is the exact meaning thereof in a given context is clear. The real confusion of the burden of proof in WTO dispute settlement is prima facie standard which, in practice, to some extent, relies on the determination by the panel on case-to-case basis.

In a country such as China, with abundant consumer products and the inevitability of product defects, claims for punitive damages are sure to arise under Article 47 of the new Chinese Tort Law. Article 47 provides that “(w)hereany producer or seller knowingly produces or sells defective products, causing death or serious damage to the health of others, the injured party may request appropriate punitive damages.” As Chinese jurists and scholars interpret Article 47, they may wish to consider whether lessons can be drawn from the American experience. During the past two decades, few areas of American law have changed more radically than the law on punitive damages. While there were once few restraints on the ability of a judge or jury to impose punitive damages in a case involving egregious conduct, today there are a host of limitations embodied in American state and federal law. In many American states, statutes or judicial decisions restrict the ability of a court to award punitive damages by narrowly defining the types of conduct that will justify a punitive award, raising the standard of proof, capping the amount of punitive damages, requiring a portion of a punitive award to be forfeited to the state, or limiting vicarious liability for punitive damages. In addition, under federal constitutional law, the principle of due process limits the imposition of punitive damages by scrutinizing the ratio between compensatory and punitive damages and prohibiting an award to be based on harm to persons other than the plaintiff. An examination of these developments from a comparative law perspective may prove useful to the implementation of Article 47.

With nine main theses that are interspersed with each other, this paper explores and articulates some of the most important questions in natural law theory. The theses include: I. In investigating facts, one finds reasons to choose an honest self-discipline; II. Deliberating, one finds reasons similarly directing one to other intrinsic goods; III. Taken integrally, these goods and principles acquire the force of moral precepts; IV. Those precepts, natural moral law, depict our nature (humanity) in its flourishing; V. Nature and natures are best explained by free, intelligent transcendent creation; VI. Creation and other gifts past and present deserve our gratitude; VII. Natural moral law and historical revelation are two channels of information; VIII. Secular and spiritual communities are distinct and respectfully self-governing; IX. Natural moral law defines human rights but rightfully extends beyond them.

This article reviews social regulatory and redistributive policies in China that aim at fostering digital inclusion of persons with disabilities. We examine the emerging Chinese policies and how China has responded to the impacts of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on digital inclusion in terms of redistribution, market regulation, involvement of persons with disabilities and disabled people’s organizations (DPOs), and awareness-raising campaigns. The policy review demonstrates that the Chinese policy framework contains a few redistributive initiatives, for example, cash transfer programs, and free distribution of information and communications technology (ICT). These have the potential to increase the uptake of ICT among persons with disabilities. The Chinese policy framework also includes provisions to ensure consultation with individual persons with disabilities and DPOs in the deliberation and implementation of ICT accessibility policies. While China has initiated awareness-raising campaigns among market actors about the importance of digital inclusion, so far, the Chinese government has adopted little legal regulation of the market to foster accessibility to ICT. The article thus argues that some of the limitations may be due to the way state–market relations have developed since the economy opened up in 1978. Apart from the growing benefits of several cash transfer programs, we have not seen major changes or adjustments to the current policy framework during the efforts to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on digital inclusion.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a chain of socioeconomic effects worldwide. China’s social and economic operations and labor market have also been suffered because of this global crisis. During hard times, flexible employment becomes an important means for stabilizing employment. However, the pandemic also exposed the problems ensuing from insufficient legal protection for flexible workers. First, there are some gaps and defects in the labor and social security laws in terms of their scope and applicability to flexible workers. Second, there were limitations in the support and protection policies for flexible workers at the early stages of the pandemic. Although the government implemented measures soon after the outbreak of COVID-19, their role is still constrained by the legal lacunae in protecting flexible workers. As flexible employment will continue to play a significant role in China’s labor market, the State Council issued a far-reaching official document in July 28, 2020 to support it. This document indicates the directions for providing better legal protection for flexible workers, which contains expanding the legal scope and enriching the legal protection. Based on the realities and latest policies, the legal protection for flexible workers should be systemically improved in the future.