Part XI of the UNCLOS lays out the legal framework for deep seabed mining activities in the Area. Several countries have already passed domestic deep seabed mining laws fulfilling their obligations under the Convention and the regulations promulgated by the ISA, established under the Convention. China passed its own deep seabed mining law in 2016. China’s deep seabed mining law aims at securing effective regulation of its sponsored contractors’ deep seabed activities and ensuring the contractors’ compliance with the rules and regulations issued by the ISA. China’s law pays tremendous attention to marine environmental protection during contractors’ deep seabed activities. This paper briefly describes the legal regime for international seabed mining, then illustrates China’s legislative actions, examines the key environmental provisions of China’s deep seabed law and analyzes the balancing of interests of multiple parties behind China’s emphasis on marine environmental protection during the exploration and exploitation of deep seabed minerals.

In the last decade, more natural disasters have occurred than before in the world. The ASEAN regions are particularly prone to such disasters. Natural disasters can happen anytime and will be a more serious problem in an armed conflict area. In disaster management, humanitarian assistance of the international community is basically subject to the principle of state sovereignty. In a conflict area, however, the principle of sovereignty must be harmonized with the doctrine of responsibility to protect. How could the ASEAN countries accept the doctrine of the responsibility to protect during natural disaster management in an armed conflict? This paper aims to analyze the doctrine of responsibility to protect in the course of managing natural disaster of an armed conflict area in terms of lessons from the ASEAN countries such as Indonesia, Myanmar and the Philippines.

North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missiles are an unprecedented threat to the security of the United States, which has never been attacked by weapons of mass destruction. Pyongyang’s provocations irritated President Trump and led him to openly consider military attacks against North Korea. The possibility of armed conflict between the United States and North Korea increased as both sides exchanged aggressive rhetoric. Military attacks against North Korea are virtually impossible in a legal as well as a practical sense. They will bring only disaster to all involved, including the US. The best way to resolve North Korea’s nuclear issue is to rehabilitate the multilateral channel for dialogue and then begin talks. What if President Trump, however, implemented military options against North Korea because of the nuclear weapons development? The focus of this essay is to explore whether Trump can adopt military options against North Korea and if so, what legal and political considerations he must take.

The rapid developments of research and teaching of international law in China have attracted the attention of international law academics of the world, who have looked over the landscape of international law in China with great interest. Unfortunately, existing literature has yet to completely satisfy their interests in this aspect. This article is intended to compensate for this gap by introducing representative international lawyers, publications, academic associations and research funding schemes on international law in China. More concretely, this paper will show the mainstream research sources of their Chinese counterparts as well as embrace teaching as part of the research system of international law in China. It is expected that, with their more attention into the holistic research methodology and the “One Belt, One Road” strategy, the Chinese academia of international law will contribute more to the international rule of law.

Since its founding in 1949, the People’s Republic of China has acceded to more than 300 multilateral treaties. Among them, China made reservations to 83 treaties, accounting for nearly 27.7 percent of the total. Evidently, for China, formulating reservations to multilateral treaties is an issue of vital importance in the process of concluding and executing multilateral treaties. This paper examines the three main reasons why China inclines to formulate reservations to the treaties, then argues that the reservations formulated by China, whether in procedure or in substance, are not only in full conformity with the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, but also full of Chinese characteristics. This paper also analyzes several specific reservations that China shall withdraw, and addresses the limitations of China’s existing treaty reservation system. Accordingly, this paper concludes that the Chinese government should improve and perfect its treaty reservation system with some suggestions.

The prohibition on torture has attained status as a peremptory norm of general international law. This gives rise to the obligation erga omnes to take action against those who torture. Despite this, most world states routinely conduct torture. Is there really a worldwide prohibition of torture? Argument is framed to demonstrate that the concept of a jus cogens peremptory norm, flowing erga omnes to all nations, is in practice unattainable, preventing any absolute and universal international law prohibition against torture. States cannot declare someone an enemy of all mankind, or bind all other states to that view. Jus cogens is a text writers’ municipal communis opinio, but held administratively to be based in customary international law. Any prohibition against torture appears to remain in municipal customary law form, breaches of which are proved as arguments based on fact, eliminating operation of any absolute peremptory governing norm.

This paper discusses enactment and enforcing processes of the Japanese renewables Feed in Tariff (FIT) Law and its amendment of 2017. Thanks to the introduction FIT in 2012, the installed capacity of renewable energy is growing rapidly. As of 2015, the renewable electricity ratio in the generated electric power amount of Japan is 14.6 percent. Meanwhile, the levy burden (surcharge) reached JPY 2.1 trillion (aprx. USD18.7 billion). Through the enactment process of the FIT Law, the upper limit of the burden initially determined by the Japanese Diet was removed. A fundamental measure could not be taken to control the installation and the burden since the law does not allow for revisions on the system based on the results of renewable installation, even if the financial burden increases rapidly. Therefore, the Japanese Diet weakened the efficiency of the FIT Law in Japan.

The abandonment of wind and PV power has become the Achilles heel that restricts the development of renewable energy in China, which is associated with institutional defects in China’s Renewable Energy Law. As a priority area in energy development, renewable energy is not substantialized. Instead, it is undermined because the guarantee system for purchasing electricity, generated by the use of renewable energy resources, in full amount, is alienated by lower-level laws. The unestablished mandatory legal obligations and responsibilities in power grid transmission networks lead to difficulties in renewable energy power generation, transmission, and accommodation. Due to the lack of continuity and stability in the feed-in tariff and subsidy policies for renewable energy, investors cannot have reasonable expectations. China’s Renewable Energy Law must be remedied to correct these existing institutional defects, and to solve the problem of wind and PV power abandonment in order to promote the healthy development of renewable energy.

Every year, China’s air quality is reaching hazardous level. Accordingly, China is adapting stringent environmental regulations under the new 13th Five Year Plan. The noticeable developments in the new air pollution regulations include: (1) mandatory air pollutant disclosure requirement; (2) shift towards non-compliance liability rule; and (3) increased penalty for transgression against wider range of industries. This paper first explains that these developments will induce American investments in China to carefully draft investment contracts, particularly confidentiality and limited liability clauses to minimize the risk of harsher penalties. The paper then argues that China’s stringent pollution regulations will not negatively affect American investment trend in China, mainly because most American investments already adhere to the OECD standard, and disclosing environmental information will enhance entity’s good reputation and attract investors.

This article explores whether China is ready to comply with its international obligations to recognize and enforce investment arbitral awards, and if not, what remains to be done. First, for ICSID awards, China has neither enacted any implementing legislation, nor designated courts or authorities are competent at recognizing and enforcing ICSID awards. Second, it is more ambiguous and complicated to seek recognition and enforcement of non-ICSID awards, due to China’s commercial reservation to New York Convention. It is uncertain whether the current provisions in national law on the recognition and enforcement of foreign commercial arbitral awards would also apply to the recognition and enforcement of non-ICSID awards. Moreover, statutes on State immunity, the common issue while enforcing both ICSID and non-ICSID awards, are quite insufficient. Finally, beyond satisfying its international obligations, investment arbitral awards issued by Chinese arbitration institutions also face obstacles of recognition and enforcement.

The Protocol for China’s accession into the WTO stipulated certain differential treatment for China, including the determination of normal value in anti-dumping investigations for the transitional period of 15 years. This treatment was authorized by the Protocol in response to concerns raised by other WTO Members at the time of China’s entry into the WTO. Since the transitional period is over in November 2016, there is an argument supporting the grant of market economy status to China, although the Protocol does not require the automatic grant of market economy after the passage of the transitional period. However, China’s recent trade measures, which have been adopted to press another WTO Member to meet its political objective, raise a question as to whether China is indeed ready for market economy status. This article analyzes such case and offers a view on the grant of market economy status to China.

To promote global trade governance, both central and peripheral reforms occur in multilateral and regional trade agreements. The central reforms are suggested to enhance the WTO’s efficiency in trade negotiations by engaging in ‘mini-multilateral’ negotiations and soft law-making or to expand its current advantage in dispute settlement by extending its dispute jurisdiction to investor-state disputes or trade disputes arising from PTAs. The peripheral reforms develop in two different routes; one is rule-based and is carried out by high-standard PTAs, and the other is relation-based and is exemplified by “the Belt and Road” Initiative proposed by China. While peripheral reform fragments international law, various methods of multilateralizing regionalism are suggested, such as the incorporation of the third-party most-favoured-nation clause, the simplification of the rules of origin, and the construction of multilateral agreements through the ‘building blocs’ of PTAs. Most of these reforms make achievements to some extent, although they also have deficiencies.

The current scale of the import trade of the US with China is significant and has the potential to be more in near future. However, patent-based disputes, especially in terms of Section 337 investigation, have also been increased in recent years. In the context of parallel development of national innovation strategies of China’s “Made in China 2025 Plan” and the American “Advanced Manufacturing Partnership,” along with the latest expanded “Information Technology Agreement” in the WTO trading system, the implications for optimally resolving patent-based disputes in the US import trade with China is highly significant for two countries. These disputes may even impact the world trade, since bilateral trade between China and the US accounts for a considerable proportion. Thus, both China and the US should take precautions and appropriate measures to guard against such potential frictions in order to attain mutually beneficial outcomes in resolving such disputes.

China’s sole nationality principle was formulated at the beginning of the People’s Republic of China. However, it was not officially adopted as a legal standard until 1980 when New China promulgated its first nationality act. Sole nationality, initiated as an expedient for foreign policy, was originally designed to help with neighbourliness. However, not only did it fail to achieve this goal, but it even resulted in more domestic institutional discrimination among Chinese people. Nowadays, in such a globalization and ‘humanrightization’ era, international law and domestic nationality laws in most countries throughout the world recognize an individual’s right to a nationality, and accept dual nationality so as to facilitate migrants’ returning to their homelands and help them reintegrate into local communities. Contemporary theory and practice of international law support the legitimacy of dual nationality. Also, China has experience in dealing with dual nationality. It would therefore be legitimate, beneficial and practical for China to restore dual nationality.

The judicial protection of IP is the most important and fundamental guarantee for the protection of IP in China. The judicial protection system of IP in China has experienced the development procedure of setting up a special pilot tribunal, "three-hearing-in-one" and a special court. The establishment and operation of IP courts in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou marks the establishment of the new hearing system for IP dispute in China. The founding and operation of IP courts have an in-depth background. With the rapid development of the economy in China, especially since the entrance of the WTO, there have been more IP cases and they constitute huge challenges for adjudication of IP disputes in China. In this regard, the IP courts is a good way to cope with. The establishment of IP courts will undoubtedly has deeper influence and significance in the judicial