Jeju 4.3 refers to a seven year and seven month long period of events; from the 1947 Gwandeokjang Square incident on March 1st, 1947 at Buk Elementary, where a horsed police officer’s mistake lead to casualties that many citizens felt was inadequately investigated to September 21st, 1954, when the Geumjok area of Hallasan was fully opened, officially ending the lock down of Jeju Island. In Jeju, 4.3 was a taboo word. Jeju 4.3 slowly began to rise to the surface of discussion after the collapse of the Syngman Rhee regime in the April Revolution of 1960. In May 1960, the "April 3 Incident Fact-finding Committee," which was led by seven students from Jeju National University, became an organization and began the work of uncovering the truth about Jeju 4.3. In the literary world, Kim Seok-beom's "Hwasando" was published in 1976, and Hyun Ki-Young’s "Aunt Suni", which deals with the massacre in Bukchon was published in 1978, talked about the pain of Jeju 4.3. Later, the political communities tried to console the bereaved families who suffered from national violence through the enactment of the Jeju 4.3 Special Law. As of 2016, discussions on the revision of the Jeju April 3 Special Law were continuously raised and five revisions were submitted to the National Assembly, drawing keen attention from political circles. In the end, Jeju politicians, academia, and civic groups are still making efforts for amendment to be passed through the 21th National Assembly.

Special law on the development of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province and the formation of Jeju International Free City is the basic law that regulates the order of Jeju society. However, with Jeju Special Law considered to be the development law, criticism has been raised on what was the purpose of the Special Self-Governing Province. Efforts are also being made to reflect the position of Jeju in the constitution in 2018, but it is not easy to drop the label of development-oriented laws again if the actual direction of special laws on Jeju is not established properly. The wrong meeting between Jeju's special autonomous province and the international free city has led to criticism on various issues, such as reckless development, environmental degradation, and the rise of land prices and damage to residents.

Monopolistic mechanisms can be detected in China in many respects through Chinese internet monopolists would outperform their peers in the US or the EU by. The Chinese government endeavors to keep its Internet industry globally competitive and thus authorities involved in antitrust activities tend to tolerate the oligopolistic structure of the market. This is evidenced most obviously in the repression of competitors in certain fields, e.g., ‘Baidu,’ the ‘Chinese Google,’ in the field of IT-services – leading to a stricter regime of monopoly control in terms of substantial law. However, in the course of enforcement, various legal and practical challenges impede the efficiency of these measures. This paper analyses existing competition law enforcement and proposes effective application of antitrust law for its enforcement in the Internet industry under present Chinese law.

Three foreign investment laws of China were enacted when she was mainly a capitalimporting state. The main purpose of these laws was to boost the Chinese economy with the capital, technology and management of foreign investors. Many preferential treatments, rather than national treatment, were given to foreign investment especially before the country joined the WTO. Following the reform of market economy, fair and equal treatment to foreign investors are replacing the preferential treatments. A new draft of Foreign Investment Law was released in the spring of 2015 to reform the governance of foreign investment by granting national treatment to foreign investors in both admission and operation. The restrictions to foreign investment will be subject to the categories of special administrative measures, which are composed of forbidden and restrictive categories. This is going to be China’s biggest reform on the legal system of foreign investment since 1980s.

After the catastrophic financial crisis in of 2008, a significant portion of the legal academia in the globe has started to concentrate on the interrelationship between law, financial stability and economic development. Through reviewing the voluminous literature in this field, it is figured out that the scope of law has been largely confined to strengthening regulation of the pre-crisis unbundled derivative transactions and enhancing cooperation among sovereign States by making formal sources of international law. Few discussions have been made to scrutinize the existing regulatory structures for the domestic financial markets of sovereign countries and demonstrate the potential possessed by informal international law in reinforcing the efficacy of these regulatory structures. By comparing the financial regulatory structures in Hong Kong, Mainland China, the UK and the US and the core principles of the BIS, the IOSCO and the IAIS, this article attempts to fill in the above research gap to some extent.

The right to freedom of religion is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed in many international and regional human rights instruments. Several international documents safeguard freedom of religion including the right to convert from one faith to another. In Malaysia, the safeguard of this fundamental right is provided under Article 11(1) of the Federal Constitution with some limitations. The right to convert out of one’ s faith is not mentioned explicitly. However, for the non- Muslims, this right to opt out of one’ s faith and choose another has been regarded as an implicit part of religious liberty guaranteed by Article 11. In relation to the Muslims, the issue of apostasy is regarded as a taboo as well as a politically explosive proposition. This paper aims to examine the concept of freedom of religion under international law focusing mainly on the issue of apostasy in the context of the Malaysian Federal Constitution. The paper concludes that the position of Muslims especially in the context of embracing a new religion remains unsettled.

The right to free interpretation in criminal proceedings is one of the important components of the right to fair trial in international law. It applies to everyone within the territory and jurisdiction of the State, including those ethnic minorities who speak and write different languages from the ethnic majority. The international human rights treaty bodies and regional human rights courts expanded the scope of this right and imposed more obligations upon the State parties through the general comments and jurisprudences. This right serves to the interest of the right to fair trial in criminal proceedings. Under Chinese law, there might be two or more languages used in judicial proceedings in ethnic autonomous areas. In the case that one specific language is designated as the language to prosecute and try a specific criminal case, the Chinese judicial organs must provide interpretation and translation to the participant who is not familiar with that specific language. Therefore the right to free interpretation is implied in Chinese law and preserves the constitutional principle of equality to all ethnicities and the right to fair trial. The problem, however, is that such a right is not well implemented in Chinese judicial practice. Several practices are inconsistent with the minimum standards developed by the jurisprudence of the international human rights treaty bodies. It is suggested that China establish the regulations and judicial interpretations that comply with international minimum standards, and provide a robust constitutional review mechanism or national human rights institution to remedy the victims for violations of this right.

The creation of the Iraqi Special Tribunal in December 2003 by Iraqi authorities who were at the time under the legal occupation of the Coalition Provisional Authority marked the emergence of a new form of internationalized domestic tribunals. The Iraqis succeeded in incorporating the full range of modern crimes into their domestic codes alongside some carefully selected domestic offenses, while amending domestic procedural law in some key ways to align the process with established international law related to the provision of full and fair trials. The subsequent investigations and the beginning of trial proceedings generated major debates about the legitimacy of such a domestic forum within the context of human rights norms and the law of occupation. In particular, there was a major strand of thought from outside Iraq that the most legitimate and appropriate forum would have been an international process under the authority of the United Nations. This article examines the arguments made by the Iraqis who demanded a domestic process based on their inquisitorial model, setting them in the broader context of the emerging trends in international criminal law. Through a detailed and unique analysis of the provisions of human rights law and underlying Iraqi procedural law, it criticizes the arguments made by some that assume the illegitimacy of the tribunal under established international norms. The article provides the most detailed explanation of the law of occupation as it emerged following World War II to conclude that the establishment of the Tribunal as an independent court, and its subsequent validation by sovereign Iraqi domestic authorities, was completely valid and proper. The overarching theme of the article is that the imposition of artificial standards and the complete revocation of the preexisting Iraqi judicial structures would have created a process deemed wholly illegitimate by the Iraqi people and judiciary that would have undermined the establishment of the rule of law in Iraq. The author’s personal interactions with the judges serve to support the conclusion that the Tribunal is capable of serving as the doorway through which the detailed body of international criminal law is introduced to the broader Arabic speaking world.