2022•Modern ChinaRequires access

The Judicial Document as Informal State Law: Judicial Lawmaking in China’s Courts

Shucheng Wang

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

Judicial documents, which interpret statutory laws and make new rules for adjudication, have become a robust basis for judicial decision making in China. This article examines why and how, with no explicit congressional delegation, the practice of producing judicial documents has become embedded in the adjudication of China’s courts; how judges can effectively refer to judicial documents during adjudication; and the extent to which judicial documents have enabled subnational courts, under the dual leadership of superior courts and the local Party committee, to efficiently and effectively respond to subnational diversity and differences in local politics. It proposes the theory that this judicial lawmaking practice exists in a “twilight zone” between legal and illegal and examines why it is suitable for maintaining the political resilience of China’s authoritarian regime.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Judicial documents, which interpret statutory laws and make new rules for adjudication, have become a robust basis for judicial decision making in China. This article examines why and how, with no explicit congressional delegation, the practice of producing judicial documents has become embedded in the adjudication of China’s courts; how judges can effectively refer to judicial documents during adjudication; and the extent to which judicial documents have enabled subnational courts, under the dual leadership of superior courts and the local Party committee, to efficiently and effectively respond to subnational diversity and differences in local politics. It proposes the theory that this judicial lawmaking practice exists in a “twilight zone” between legal and illegal and examines why it is suitable for maintaining the political resilience of China’s authoritarian regime.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Judicial documents, which interpret statutory laws and make new rules for adjudication, have become a robust basis for judicial decision making in China. This article examines why and how, with no explicit congressional delegation, the practice of producing judicial documents has become embedded in the adjudication of China’s courts; how judges can effectively refer to judicial documents during adjudication; and the extent to which judicial documents have enabled subnational courts, under the dual leadership of superior courts and the local Party committee, to efficiently and effectively respond to subnational diversity and differences in local politics. It proposes the theory that this judicial lawmaking practice exists in a “twilight zone” between legal and illegal and examines why it is suitable for maintaining the political resilience of China’s authoritarian regime.

Key concepts: Lawmaking, Adjudication, Law, Political science, Judicial activism, Judicial independence, Statutory law, Delegation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Judicial Document as Informal State Law: Judicial Lawmaking in China’s Courts — Research Paper | ScholarLens