Many Chinese scholars advocate transplanting the American Gideon to improve the quality of criminal defense and legal aid in China. Nowadays, less than thirty percent of criminal defendants in China have counsels to represent them, and this has worsened since the year of 2012, because laws and policies have expanded the legal aid to more candidates, while the appropriations cannot keep pace with the explosive caseload. Institutional impediments also frustrate lawyers’ efforts in providing effective representation, and there is no remedy for ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims. This paper calls for a fuller understanding of the Gideon’s broken promise in the US, and argues that the forces most essential to the support of the Chinese Gideon can only come from China’s practice and experience.

Human rights education is an important measure for promoting respect for the fundamental rights and freedom of individuals. In the Chinese context, scholars have paid an increasing attention to human rights education. With special references to the UN Documents and relevant literature, the issues on human rights education in the Chinese context are worthy of being explored because HRE is both a requirement of the United Nations and China’s national human rights action plan, a necessity in establishment of a harmonious society, and one that respects human rights in China. Human rights education has its own aims, functions and significance in China. The aim of this paper is to analyze the main factors affecting human rights education in China. In doing so, it examines multiple subjects, universal objects, rich contents and flexible methods. Based on aforementioned discussion, it points out existing problems affecting human rights education in China and puts forth strategies to deal with them.

Since the traditional definition of ‘foreign elements’ cannot meet the new requirements of the arbitration of China’s FTZs, Chinese judicial practice must create a useful supplement to already established standards. In free trade zone arbitration cases, Chinese courts determine foreign elements based on the standards of subject, object, and legal facts. In this regard, the explanation for ‘other circumstances’ in the First Judicial Interpretation of the Supreme Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law of the PRC on Foreign-Related Relations is based on the three abovementioned elements. The Chinese arbitration system and legislation must be further perfected; however, overly broad standards may impede China’s domestic arbitration system. Moreover, China must add certain restrictions to the standards: judges should distinguish the artificial foreign elements created by contracting parties, controversial civil relations should have a material connection with foreign countries, and discretion should be reasonable with sufficient nucleus.

Considering the large number of civil, commercial and investment disputes that arise between Chinese investors and their counterparts along the Belt and Road, it is necessary to establish a dispute settlement mechanism. The open, cooperative and non-institutionalized features of the Belt and Road Initiative require the reform and improvement of China’s domestic dispute settlement mechanism for foreign civil, commercial and investment disputes; and bilateral and multilateral dispute settlement mechanisms between or among China and the Belt and Road countries should be strengthened. When appropriate, China may propose the establishment of a multilateral dispute settlement mechanism that is especially designed for the Initiative. The status quo of dispute settlement mechanisms between China and the Belt and Road countries necessitates the establishment of a preset mechanism that uses arbitration as the primary approach, litigation as the secondary approach, and mediation as an alternative.

On December 27, 2017, the 31st session of the Standing Committee of the 12th National People’s Congress passed the Vessel Tonnage Tax Law of the People’s Republic of China. China’s Vessel Tonnage Tax Law has basically maintained the stability of the vessel tonnage tax collection system and accorded with the basic national conditions of China’s shipping industry. The system established by China’s Vessel Tonnage Tax Law is basically a traditional vessel tonnage tax system, which is different from those implemented by many other countries. This paper explores the reason why China chooses to implement the vessel tonnage tax system and evaluates the policy within a certain scope and from a certain angle. It also examines the shortcomings of China’s vessel tonnage tax system as well as the burden brought by it to the shipping enterprises and puts forward countermeasures and suggestions for reforming and perfecting the vessel tonnage tax system in China.

In Germany, the notion of corporate criminal liability has attracted the attention of lawyers, scholars, and recently of politics. At present, legal persons are not criminally responsible but may only receive administrative fines under Section 30 of the Regulatory Offences Law. In light of recent scandals involving large business enterprises, efforts are under way to expand the liability of legal persons for misconduct, possibly leading to the introduction of criminal sanctions. In China, corporate criminal responsibility for certain offenses (unit crimes) were adopted in 1997 and has been practiced ever since. Here, both the unit and its responsible members are punished if a unit crime has occurred. In addition, administrative agencies may impose administrative sanctions and measures on the unit. Since the practical and legal problems appear similarly in the German and Chinese systems, a brief review of the Chinese experience may be helpful for the German reform process.

Millions of people worldwide use the Internet. One of the many uses derived from the Internet is the development of digital trade. Digital trade thus lends itself to distinctive issues. The WTO members recognized the benefits digital trade offers and have developed a work program to facilitate the digital trade. However, their efforts have stalled, slowing down the anticipated progress. The author will try to address how the WTO supports and deals with digital trade. This essay briefly discusses the historical advancement of the Internet; defines the concept of digital trade and its development in the international market; analyzes how existing WTO agreements have dealt with digital trade; and then addresses recent trade agreements particularly the USMCA. The USMCA was chosen because it involves the largest economy in the world and the US could use its provisions as template for future trade agreements

The era of globalization has created a proverbial ‘rush’ to utilize trade and investment in developing nations. Growing fear over the abuse of developed nations’ bargaining power in these areas led the WTO to adopt remedial measures ensuring the protection of developing nations during disputes. The WTO’s dispute settlement system is unequivocally the most comprehensive form of the resolution of disputes among its Member States. Despite the numerous privileges and safeguards offered to developing Members States, reluctance and a lack of understanding in using the WTO dispute resolution process remain within these nations. This paper explains the options available to these nations, in an attempt to attract to use the dispute resolution process, and offers key insight on future amendments that can facilitate developing Member’s participation in the future. It will further articulate the statutory safeguards and favors provided to developing countries in DSS.

This article discusses American Institute for International Steel v. the United States, which is pending in the little-known United States Court of International Trade in New York. It involves an attempt to declare that the US legislation delegating authority to the president to impose trade restrictions is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. A loss would legally curtail the president’s discretionary power to use national security as a reason to impose punitive measures against trading partners. The article identifies legal trends, where this case fits into the trade policy debates, and why it is so important. The article concludes that domestic US litigation in 2019 may well have a tremendous impact on US law and the global trading system. Many in the domestic and international trading communities (as well as those in the foreign policy and national security communities) are waiting for the results of this little-known steel litigation.

The investment-related initiatives have been included in the FOCAC since its beginning. The investment promotion initiative is consistent, mutually sustainable, and goal-clear; the investment protection initiative relies on the protection from domestic and international law; the investment facilitation initiative becomes more important; the investment dispute resolution initiative proposes a creative new choice. Due to investment-related initiatives, the FDI between China and Africa is growing, the bilateral investment treaties are in progress, the investment facilitation situation is improved, and a new dispute resolution institution appears. The investment-related initiatives of FOCAC achieves great success to date.

On January 28, 2019, the US Department of Justice announced criminal charges against Huawei. A pair of indictments accusing Huawei of violating the US sanctions as well as stealing trade secrets was unsealed in two separate cases. In fact, as a technology-intensive enterprise, Huawei has always been under close scrutiny from the US government for ‘national security’ concerns, and both the criminal allegations have existed for years. The Chinese side questioned the American motives, accusing that the US is actually using law enforcement as one tool among many to achieve its policy objectives in the Huawei case. The article presents the Chinese side of the case as well as the grounds for its position.

The arrest of Meng Wanzhou, CFO of international telecom giant Huawei Technologies, have fired up political and diplomatic commotions around the world. Meng’s arrest in Vancouver based on several indictment charges accused by the US government against Meng particularly situated Canada in a precarious position of standing strong as an ally of the US, but also avoiding needless enragement of China. Because the US filed a formal extradition request to Canada, Canada’s federal Minister of Justice has to determine whether Meng’s extradition hearing will take place, by examining legal prongs under the US-Canada Extradition Treaty. The international communities will be watching closely of this contentious extradition case that will certainly have huge implications on diplomatic, economic and political relationships between the Western world and China.