Law, Politics and Society in Republican China

DATE: September 21-22, 2012

PLACE: 2223 Fulton Street, 6th Floor

CONVENERS: Chaoguang Wang, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
Jin Yilin, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
Wen-hsin Yeh, University of California, Berkeley

SPONSORS: Institute of East Asian Studies and Chinese Academy of Social Sciences




DESCRIPTION

Description

Increasingly, issues of governance and state effectiveness are taking precedence over those concerning the seizure of power and the legitimacy of the state. Interactions between state and society are taking historical center stage, displacing old preoccupations with the social basis of political regimes and the class nature of power.

An emerging focus of recent Chinese scholarship concerns the use of law in politics and society. With the recent publication of the 16-volume Zhonghua minguo shi (History of the Republic of China), a rich empirical account of the major political events centering upon the regimes of the pre-1949 period, a major reference work has enriched the field.

At this conference, the chief editors of this work, Wang Chaoguang and Jin Yilin, together with other scholars from China, the U.S., and Europe, share recent Chinese and Western scholarship on Republican Chinese law, presenting work from both sides in comparative perspective.

SCHEDULE

Schedule

All sessions are free and open to the public.

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2012

3:00–3:10: OPENING REMARKS
Wen-hsin Yeh, UC Berkeley
Wang Chaoguang, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

3:10–5:30: SESSION I
Wang Chaoguang, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (Chair)

3:10–3:30
San-min Doctrine and the Early Legislation of the Nanjing Government
He Yuan, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

3:30–3:40
Comments
Glenn Tiffert, UC Berkeley

3:40–4:00
Writing and Rewriting Election Laws in the Republic of China, 1912-1949
Joshua Hill, UC Berkeley

4:00–4:10
Comments
Li Zaiquan, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

4:10–4:30
Unacceptable but indispensable: Opium and its regulations in Canton, 1912-1936
Xavier Paules, Centre d’Etudes sur la Chine moderne et contemporaine

4:30–4:40
Comments
Du Lihong, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

4:40–4:50: Break

4:50–5:30: Discussion

5:30: Adjourn

6:00: Dinner



SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2012

10:00–12:10: SESSION II
Jin Yilin, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (Chair)

10:00–10:20
Between the Law and the Society: The Food Sanitary Administration in Peking 1909-1937
Du Lihong, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

10:20–10:30
Comments
Glenn Tiffert, UC Berkeley

10:30–10:50
Means with Legality vs. Means without Legality: On the “Radicalization” of the CCP’s Land Reform in Late 1940s, Northern China
Li Lifeng, Nanjing University

10:50–11:00
Comments
Margherita Zanasi, Louisiana State University

11:00–11:20
Ideology and the Law in Nationalist China: The Case of the New Life Movement
Margherita Zanasi, Louisiana State University

11:20–11:30
Comments
He Yuan, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

11:30–12:10: Discussion

12:10–1:00: Lunch


1:00–3:10: SESSION III
Wen-hsin Yeh, UC Berkeley (Chair)

1:00–1:20
The Development of Party Rule in the Judicial Field: Personnel Changes and Political Turning of the Nanjing National Government’s Judicial Pivot, 1927-1937
Li Zaiquan, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

1:20–1:30
Comments
Xavier Paules, Centre d’Etudes sur la Chine moderne et contemporaine

1:30–1:50
Morality and Law in the New Life Movement
Liu Wennan, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

1:50–2:00
Comments
Joshua Hill, UC Berkeley

2:00–2:20
An Irresistible Inheritance: Republican Judicial Modernization and its Legacies to the PRC
Glenn Tiffert, UC Berkeley

2:20–2:30
Comments
Li Lifeng, Nanjing University

2:30–3:10: Discussion

3:10–3:20: Break


3:20–4:20: ROUNDTABLE
Contemporary Relevance of the Republican Legal Legacy

Alex Cook, UC Berkeley (Chair)
Wen-hsin Yeh, UC Berkeley
Wang Chaoguang, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
Jin Yilin, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

4:20–5:20: GENERAL DISCUSSION

5:20–5:30: CLOSING COMMENTS
Wen-hsin Yeh, UC Berkeley
Wang Chaoguang, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

5:30: Adjourn

6:00: Dinner

Click here to download a copy of the conference agenda. Updated September 21, 2012.

ABSTRACTS

Abstracts

杜丽红
中国社会科学院近代史研究所
依法行政:民国时期北京饮食卫生管理研究

本文拟重构民国时期食品卫生法律颁布和执行的历史过程,讨论行政法律文本是如何在民国时期政治转型过程中成型,以及依法行政在城市事务中的实践。文章将分为三部分。第一部分将讨论与食品卫生有关的法律文本的渊源。北京城市管理法规创制于清末新政,由京师警察厅颁布,来源于对外国法律的借鉴。民国时期,延用了清代法律文本,内容有所拓展。第二部分分析食品卫生法律的管辖权问题。行政权力的执行决定于行政系统的组织状况。民国时期,北京市政体系由单一制走向多元化、专业化,卫生局于1928年从警察局分立出来,成为专门从事卫生管理的部门。在这个过程中食品卫生的管理逐步正规化,医学人才进入到卫生部门管理岗位,而且卫生部门也开始培训具有专业知识的行政人员。但是由于制度的限制,部分食品卫生的管辖权仍然归属于警察部门。第三部分用两个案例讨论食品卫生执法的实践状况。第一个案例讲述北京的霍乱流行对市政当局注重饮食卫生的促进作用。第二个案例讲述北京市在筹建屠宰场过程中所引发的市政当局与行业协会之间的利益之争。这两个案例将帮助我们了解食品安全执法的制约因素,进而深化对市政管理中依法行政的理解。中国城市管理的依法行政经历了先有法律文本后有依法治理的过程,契合了中国人“没有规矩不成方圆”的传统,也体现了依法行政需要社会的整体发展为基础,仅有法律文本是不够的。

DU Lihong
Institute of Modern History, CASS
The Administration by Law: A Study of the Regulations of Food Safety in Pekingduring the Republic of China

This paper studies how the Peking Municipality administrated food safety issues via legal codes from 1911 to 1937. The project studies the roles played by the Rule of Law during the historical process of Chinese modernization and urbanization. Peking Municipality experienced a huge change from the old military administrative system to a civil system of public administration. A study of the Peking's food safety regulation provides pertinent cases to analyze the transformation process.

This article includes three parts. The first part will discuss the origins of the food safety law in Peking. By the end of the Qing Dynasty, foreign law were translated into Chinese and integrated into existing law. The Capital Police Department announced administrative law on food safety in 1907. After the Republic of China was founded, the municipal government successively took the regulations on food safety as its responsibility and enacted related law. Since 1928, the Health Department was setup, in charge of professional sanitary administration. The contents of the food safety law became more detailed and technicalized.

The second part will describe the administrative jurisdiction of food safety. The structure of the Peking municipal government defined the implementation of food safety law. The food safety was a new concept to most Chinese and to the government. The food safety was closely related to scientific knowledge, especially that of medical science. It was a responsibility of the government to build up specialized experimental institutions and to train professionals. In this part, I try to answer the following questions: 1. Which department had the power to regulate the food safety? 2. How did they train officials with the specific knowledge and techniques required for food safety administration? 3. What was the executive procedure of food safety law?

The last part will analyze the practice of food safety regulations. The implementation of the regulations was related to not only people's daily life, but also the internal conflicts between the public and private interests. Moreover, it means that the state power got involved in the business of the traditional guilds and menaced their interests. There are two examples discussed in this part: One is the epidemic disease of cholera and the food safety regulation; the other example is the regulations on slaughter house. This part explains how the political consents were shaped between these guilds and the municipality. The two cases will demonstrate how food safety law was practiced and why the food safety administration was inefficient in the Republic of China.


贺渊
中国社会科学院近代史研究所

南京国民政府建立之初,在法学造诣较深的国民党元老胡汉民的主持下,规定新政权“以三民主义为立法原则”。

胡汉民归纳三民主义立法原则要义有三:1、“政治力量平衡的原则”,即立法目的不在保障个人而在保障社会,其实质是以“社会的原则”取代西方“人权的原则”;2、“权能区分的原则”,以“政府有能,人民有权”为目标,但目前为训政时期实施“以党治国”,即把治权和政权统统纳入国民党之囊中;3、“权利义务的原则”,因为个人的生命财产与利益,为社会生命财产利益的一部分,所以个人不能随便处置。社会对于个人权利的认可,以个人对社会的所尽义务的程度作为衡量标准。上述要义彻底否定了西方以个人主义为基础,所有保障为依据的立法原则,实质可归结为“以社会为本位”。

胡汉民认为,“三民主义的立法原则”避免了资本主义个人保障主义之弊;将建国程序分成三个阶段,以宪政为目标,最终“还政于民”,又不同于苏俄式的专制和法西斯主义。三民主义的立法原则适用于当时的训政时期,也适用于将来的宪政时期。

以“三民主义为立法原则”的提出,充分体现了国民党力图摆脱外来体制的影响,寻找中国式道路的努力。

本人认为,胡汉民提出的“三民主义立法原则”与孙中山思想有不完整的承继关系,也源于他对当时国际上立法的一些新特点的误解(将自由经济下的权利原则的修改,当成了社会本位的立法原则)。国民政府训政的实施,诠释了社会本位立法原则的本质是剥夺人民的权利,这样的政体能否孕育宪政,值得怀疑。

HE Yuan
Institute of Modern History, CASS
On "The Three People's Principles as Legislative Principles"

Upon the establishment of Nanjing National Government, under the charge of one of the early leaders of the Kuomintang(or the Chinese National Party), Hu Hanmin, who was well versed in the subject of law, the new government adopted the Three People's Principles as its legislative principles.

The legislative principles, according to Hu Hanmin, come down to three. (1) "The principle of balancing political powers," that is, the aim of legislation is not so much at guaranteeing individuals' rights than guaranteeing society's proper functioning. The essence of this principle is to use "societal principle" to replace Western's "principle of individual's rights." (2) "The principle that separates rights and executive powers," according to which (in its ideal form) "the government has executive powers whereas the people have the rights." However, since the new government was currently under its political tutelage by the Kuomintang, "Party Rules the Country" practice was provisionally adopted, in which people's power (or government by the people) and executive power were both represented by the Party. (3) "The principle of rights and obligations," according to which, since individuals' lives, properties, and interests are an integral part of the society's life, properties, and interests, they are not to be at individuals' disposal. Society's approval of individuals' right is in proportion to the degree in which individuals fulfill their obligations to the society. These three legislative principles completely rejected the Western legislative principles which are founded on individual rights. The gist of the above three legislative principles clearly focuses on society as a whole than on individuals.

Hu Hanmin argued that "Three People's Principles as Legislative Principles" can avoid the problems in capitalist, individualism. He divided the establishment of the Republic of China into three stages. The Republic of China has constitutional government as its final aim. The current Kuomintang's political tutelage will eventually "return its rule to the people." The government of the Republic of China will be different from both Soviet-Russian totalitarianism and Fascism. "The Three People's Principles as Legislative Principles" are applicable currently to Kuomintang's political tutelage as well as to the future constitutional government.

The proposal of "The Three People's Principles as Legislative Principles" reflects Kuomintang's efforts in avoiding directly copying from existing Western capitalistic legislative principles and in seeking legislative principles suitable to China's reality.

I argue that there are some discrepancies between Hu Hanmin's "Three People's Principles as Legislative Principles" and Sun Yat-sen's thoughts .The discrepancies may have been caused by Hu's misunderstanding of the then popular legislative principles (systems) in the world.Kuomintang's political tutelary practice in the new government, which stresses the legislative principle of society standard, essentially means the deprivation of people's rights. It is doubtful that such a regime can establish a constitutional government.


Joshua HILL
The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University
"Writing and Rewriting Election Laws in the Republic of China, 1912-1949"

Voting was a common political activity throughout the Republican era, but the laws that governed it changed greatly during the period 1912-1949. My paper examines the transition from the early Republic's system of indirect, limited franchise elections to the direct, mass suffrage elections held by various governments from the 1920s onward. This transformation of election law was both a reaction to the perceived failures of the early Republic's electoral system and an attempt to incorporate elements of a post-World War One European discourse on voting into the Republic of China's own political system. As such, it represented Chinese participation in a global re-imagining of the purpose and methods of voting during the interwar period. Although these new ideas would later form the basis of the post-1927 Nationalist government's electoral system, they were first manifested in the tentative and largely abortive electoral experiments conducted as part of the provincial autonomy movement in the early 1920s. As such, the indigenization of a legal infrastructure for mass suffrage, direct elections in China was one of the signal, if often unrecognized, legacies of the provincial autonomy movement.


李里峰
南京大学政府管理学院
中共土改中的法制话语与实践

抗日战争结束后,中国共产党和各解放区政权制定了大量的纲领、法律、条例、命令、决议,这些法律文本及其实践与解放区广泛开展的土地改革运动交互作用,为中共成功地动员农民群众、获取政治优势并最终赢得内战发挥了积极作用。本文将以华北地区为中心,对这一时期解放区的司法机构、调解制度,以及刑事、土地、婚姻等方面的司法实践进行初步考察,藉以揭示中共革命法律传统的运作特征。各项法律的制定和司法体系的形成,既显示了中国共产党与国民党的“反动法律”划清界限、以全新的“人民法律”、“革命法律”取而代之的姿态和决心;也反映了它在国共内战的动荡局面中寻求秩序、对解放区实施有效治理的迫切需要。与此同时,阶级斗争、群众路线、战争动员等理论制约与现实压力,亦使中共的立法和司法不可能具备西方法律传统中司法独立、程序至上的自由主义和形式主义特征;反之,法律须服务于革命斗争的需要(如反革命罪的提出、保障军婚的规定),人民群众的需要(如土地改革的立法、人民法庭的设立),社会治理的需要(如调解制度的确立)。因此,中共土改期间的立法与司法实践,并非将法律作为治理国家之基本原则的“法治”尝试,而是将法律作为动员与治理之有效手段的“法制”话语。

LI Lifeng
School of Government, Nanjing University
The Discourse and Practice of "Rule by Law" in Chinese Communist Land Reform

After the Anti-Japanese War, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and regimes of the liberated areas worked out a large number of guidelines, laws, regulations, commands, and resolutions. These legal documents and their implementations, interacting with the land reform movement swept across the liberated areas, played an active role in the CCP's successful mobilization of the rural masses, achievement of political leverage, and eventual victory of the civil war. Focusing on North China from 1945 to 1949, this paper explores the judicial organs, the mediation system, and the judicial practices related to crime, land distribution, and marriage in the liberated areas, so as shed light on the operation of the CCP's revolutionary legal tradition. The formulation of various legal documents and the establishment of judicial system revealed the CCP's resolution to break with the Kuomintung (KMT)'s "reactive legal system" and to set up its own brand-new "people's legal system" or "revolutionary legal system". On the other hand, it also reflected the CCP's exigent need to seek order amidst the turbulent civil war and to realize effective governance of the liberated areas. Furthermore, due to the theoretic restrictions and the practical pressures of class struggle, mass line, and military mobilization, the legislature and judicatory of the CCP were not likely to follow such liberal and formal western legal traditions as judicial independence, procedure justice, etc.. By contrast, the law of the CCP must serve revolutionary struggle (e.g. definition of the crime of counter-revolution and special protection of soldiers' marriage), serve the masses (e.g. legislation of the land reform and establishment of the people's tribunal), and serve public governance (e.g. foundation of the mediation system). The CCP's legislative and judicial practice during the land reform, therefore, were not an attempt of "rule of law" which took law as a fundamental principle of state governance, but a discourse of "rule by law" which utilized law for efficient mobilization and governance.


李在全
中国社会科学院近代史研究所
党治在司法领域的推演:1927-1937 年南京政府司法中枢的人事嬗变与政治转向

1927年南京国民政府成立后,国民党逐步掌控全国政权,厉行“以党治国”,但国民党党治的推展并不均衡,也不同步。就司法领域而言,在国民政府成立初期,司法中枢基本以北洋旧人为班底,总体上依旧延续北洋时期的司法独立与超越党派政治之理念。1932年居正出任司法院院长,国民党革命元老们开始进入司法中枢,北洋旧人逐渐退出,到1935年前后司法中枢基本完成人事嬗变;与此同时,鉴于司法现状无法满足国民党的政治需要,并在民族危机的刺激下,国民党政权强调司法的政治性,重新宣扬、推进司法党化。至此,即南京国民政府成立约八年之后,国民党人才真正掌控了司法中枢,司法中枢完成从北洋时代到国民党党治时代的递嬗。但终国民党统治时代,其对司法系统中下层的渗透、控制、整合却未能成功,司法理念及人员构成依然保留着浓厚的北洋遗风。

LI Zaiquan
Institute of Modern History, CASS
The Development of Party Rule in the Judicial Field: Personnel Changes and Political Turnning of the Nanjing National Government's Judicial Pivot, 1927-1937

After the establishment of the Nanjing National government in 1927, the Kuomintang gradually founded a national regime and started to practice the principle of "governing the nation by party". But implementations of party rule were neither prevailing nor simultaneous. When the National Government initiated, the judicial branch stemmed from former Beiyang group who generally pursued the concept of "judicial independence" and "beyond party politics" which had been formed in the Beiyang period. In 1932, as Ju Zheng became head of the Department of Justice, the founding members of Kuomintang began to enter the judicial pivot to replace the old Beiyang group, and the personnel change was completed around 1935. Meanwhile, with the stimulation of national crisis and in consideration of the judicial status quo didn't satisfy its political requirement, Kuomintang emphasized the political nature of the judiciary, and advocated the judicial party-rule. Thereupon, the Kuomintang members began to obtain the de facto control of the judicial center place after the set up of the Nanjing National Government for about eight years, which means the finishment of the judicial practice development from the Beiyang era to the Kuomintang's party rule. Nevertheless, during the following years, it failed to permeate, dominate and integrate the middle and lower levels of judicial system, among which the judicial concepts and personnel structure still retained the grumous Beiyang legacy.


刘文楠
中国社会科学院近代史研究所
“规矩清洁”的法律和道德基础:新生活运动的合法性问题初探(1934-1937)

1934年2月蒋介石在南昌发起的新生活运动虽然以恢复中国固有的“礼义廉耻”道德为纲领,但具体实践的措施却首先强调个人生活的“规矩”和“清洁”。本文试图探讨新生活运动以国家主导的道德宣传和公权力直接干预的方式使个人生活“规矩清洁”,是建立在怎样的法律和道德基础上。以往对新生活运动的研究往往强调其道德改良的一面,但仅就运动初期的“规矩清洁”要求而言,不仅具有道德色彩,甚至还可以说已经有法律的基础。晚清和民初就有《违警条例》的颁布实施,其中就有对个人需在公共场所保持清洁秩序的规定。1928年南京国民政府又模仿英国的Nuisances Removal Act制订了《污物扫除法》,也有条款规范个人生活以保障城市公共卫生。然而在新生活运动的推行过程中,从未诉诸这类已有的法律条文。尽管汪精卫希望将新生活运动引入法治轨道,但蒋介石还是决定将其作为国家主导的全民道德动员,把对个人生活的“规矩清洁”理解为民族精神的有机组成部分,并以此为民族复兴的开端。文章将根据北京、上海、南京市档案馆1934-1937年间的市政档案和新生活运动档案,考察在新生活运动推行“规矩清洁”的过程中,法律惩诫和道德教化到底处于怎样的互动关系中。由此探讨新生活运动这样由国家公权力干涉个人生活的道德改良运动,权力运用的合法性何在,有效实施的途径又何在。

LIU Wennan
Institute of Modern History, CASS
Morality and Law in the New Life Movement

In February 1934, Chiang Kai-shek launched the New Life Movement in Nanchang. Although this movement set a high aim to revive the cardinal virtues of “etiquette, loyalty, integrity, and conscientiousness” in the Chinese tradition, its concrete implementation focusing on the “orderliness” and “cleanliness” of people's daily lives revealed its nature as a disciplinary campaign to produce “docile bodies” in the Foucauldian sense. This paper intends to examine the legal and moral foundations on which the New Life Movement directly utilized the state power to discipline people's everyday conduct. Based on the discourse of “rule of law,” Wang Jingwei, the civil national leader then, intended to restrict Chiang's use of state power in the movement. To respond to Wang's challenge, Chiang Kai-shek assigned the role of moral suasion, instead of coercive discipline, to government agents in the implementation of the movement, while integrating the movement into the government routine at the same time. Contemporary commentators agreed that the New Life Movement could benefit the rule of law and maintain the social order with its moral power, though they disagreed with how deeply the state should involved in this movement. The comparison between the New Life directives and the existing laws and regulations shows that the New Life Movement created an arena of state control independent from rule of law. Founded on the promise of the rule of morality and the ideal of tutelage government, this arena indeed embodied the ambition of a police state that disciplined people with counter-law.


Xavier PAULES
Centre d'études sur la Chine moderne et contemporaine, CNRS
"Unacceptable but indispensable: Opium and its regulations in Canton, 1912-1936"

The Cantonese authorities were facing a dilemma regarding opium during most of the Republican period. On one hand this substance was considered the symbol of China's weakness and backwardness and its suppression a top priority. But on the other hand, opium taxes represented an indispensable source of fiscal income.

This paper will explore the various ways authorities tried to overcome that dilemma. Ignoring opium altogether and publishing no regulations concerning it was one option. Another possibility was hypocrisy, id est to publish prohibition laws but not enforce them. The third option became dominant after 1924: the authorities openly ruled an opium monopoly but tried their best to come out with "acceptable" opium regulations.

The paper will also pay special attention to the differences of the legislation regarding opium between Nanking and Chen Jitang regime in the mid-1930s. The strategy of the Nanking regime was to use the Six Years Plan (1934-1940) to delegitimize Chen Jitang and to force him to take effective steps towards a prohibition.


Glenn TIFFERT
UC Berkeley
"An Irresistible Inheritance: Republican Judicial Modernization and its Legacies to the PRC"

Guided by polarized representations of the revolution, commentators in both China and abroad have long treated the republican and PRC judicial systems in near hermetic isolation from one another. Yet it is impossible to grasp fully the history of the PRC judicial system independent of its republican heritage, and to decouple the two is therefore to foreclose critical avenues of understanding.

As a step towards repairing that rupture, this paper specifies the configurations and distributions of courts, and the discourses of judicial malaise and reform the republican period deposited on the doorstep of the PRC. It establishes the necessary empirical foundation from which to appreciate the institutional deficits and imbalances, developmental dilemmas, and normative discourses that confronted CCP judicial planners in 1949, and equips one to understand their responses not just through the lens of ideology, but also as reasoned responses to concrete, practical problems. Additionally, it throws light on how historiographical memory of the republican judicial system now serves as a repository of value from which to shape, assess and comprehend law's fate in the PRC.

谭安
无法抗拒的继承:民国时期司法的现代化与遗产

在对革命的两极化表达的影响下,中外的评论者都长久地把民国时期的司法制度和 人民共和国的作为互相隔绝. 但是在实际上,人民共和国司法制度的沿革,与它的 民国遗产是分不开的。 如果忽略后者就不能充足地了解前者。

作为阐述这个密切关系的初步步骤,这篇文章讲解民国晚年的法院组织体系与分布, 及司法顽症与改革的话语。本文以实证为根据,分析中共在1949年面对何种司法缺 陷与差距,发展窘境,及规范论述,以便不但以革命思想式看待建国时期的 司法建设的政策,而且把它作为对疑难问题的理性反应。此外,本文也揭开 民国司法的历史记忆如何为影响,评估,与领悟法律在人民共和国的前途与 命运的标准。


Margherita ZANASI
Louisiana State University
"Ideology and the Law in Nationalist China: The Case of the New Life Movement"

In this paper I will explore the complex relationship between party ideology and state laws within the context of Nationalist China's one-party system. More specifically, I will investigate how party-centered political movements (運動) and state laws (法律) interacted and complemented each other, on the one hand, and, on the other, generated ideological tension. As a way of examining this dynamic, I will focus on the New Life Movement (新生活運動), launched in February 1934 by the Nationalist Party. First, I will explore the state legislation and party regulations related to the Movement. I will focus in particular on the creation of semi-governmental organizations, such as the New Life Promotional Association, as well as regulations designed to support police enforcement at local level where the Movement often resulted in efforts to build a fascist-style conscription society. Second, I will explore the debate on the importance of the supposed "natural" laws intrinsic to Chinese civilization—namely, the four principles that lay at the foundation of The New Life Movement: Li, Yi, Lian, and Chi (礼义廉耻, Propriety/Rites, Justice, Integrity and Honor). These natural laws, linked to party ideology, were often presented as the foundation of a well-ordered society, thus placing state laws in a subordinate position.

The New Life Movement, therefore, struck a precarious balance between party ideology and state laws as well as between revisited traditional concepts of rites and social order and a newly emerging discourse on legality influenced by Western notions of law. This study will also contribute to our understanding of notions of legality in one-party systems in the People's Republic of China and worldwide. It will also interrogate Western scholarly approaches to legal modernization.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants

DU LIHONGInstitute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

Du Lihong, associate professor of the Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Science. She received her PH.D on modern Chinese history from Graduate School of CASS. Her study mainly focus on social history of modern China, now on the project that "The Construction of Peking Public Health Administration and Social Transformation," which examines how the public health administrative system was constructed in Peking during the urban medical modernization process and how it influenced the social transformation from the end of the Qing Dynasty to the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949. She was once visiting scholar to Johns Hopkins University of America.



HE YUANInstitute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

He Yuan, professor of the Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Science. She received her PH.D on CCP history from Renmin University of China(Beijing), and mainly focus her study on the history of the Republic of China, especially on the thought of Sun Yet-sun. She published the book Sanmin Doctrine and the Politics of China (Beijing: Social Science Document Publishing House, 1995), Study on the New Life Groups (Beijing: Social Science Document Publishing House, 2010)



JOSHUA HILLThe Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University

Joshua Benjamin Hill received his Ph.D. from Harvard University and his undergraduate degree from Yale University. Hill specializes in the history of modern China with a specific interest in twentieth century political history. He has taught at Harvard University and Tufts University, and is currently a Visiting Scholar at the Center for Chinese Studies. His dissertation, "Voting as a Rite: Changing Ideas of Elections in Early Twentieth Century China," explored the political, cultural, and intellectual consequences of popular elections on mainland China from the last years of the Qing dynasty to the early days of the Communist era.



WILLIAM C. KIRBYHarvard University

William C. Kirby is the T. M. Chang Professor of China Studies at Harvard University and Spangler Family Professor of Business Administration at the Harvard Business School. He is director of the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies and chairman of the Harvard China Fund. A historian of modern China, Professor Kirby's work examines China's business, economic, and political development in an international context. He has written on the evolution of modern Chinese business (state-owned and private), Chinese corporate law and company structure, the history of freedom in China, the international socialist economy of the 1950s, relations across the Taiwan Strait, and China's relations with Europe and America. His current projects include case studies of contemporary Chinese businesses and a comparative study of higher education in China, Europe, and the United States.



LI LIFENGSchool of Government, Nanjing University

Li Lifeng, professor of School of Government, Nanjing University. He received his Ph. D. in modern Chinese history from Nanjing University. His research covers Chinese political history, government and politics in contemporary China, and political theory.He has published The Revolutionary Party and the Rural Society (Nanjing: Jiangsu People's Publishing House, 2011) and about thirty journal papers, among which are "From Event History to Event Approach", "Rational Man in Mass Movement", "The Horizon and Methods of New Political History", etc. He is also the Chinese translator of Awakening China by John Fitzgerald, Political Philosophy by David Miller, and History by John Arnold.



LI ZAIQUANInstitute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

Li Zaiquan, associate professor of the Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Science. He received his PH.D on modern Chinese History from Beijing Normal University and then work in the Institute mainly on the history of the Republic of China, especially on the legal system of that time. He just published his book Law Rule and Party Rule: Judicial System under the Party Rule of the KMT Regime (Beijing: Social Science Document Publishing House, 2011).



LIU WENNANInstitute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

Liu Wennan, assistant professor of the Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Science. She received her Ph.D. at University of California, Berkeley, then, she work in the Institute as editor of the Journal of Modern Chinese History, a international joint published academic magazine. Her research interest lies in the governance of everyday life in modern China.



XAVIER PAULESCentre d'études sur la Chine moderne et contemporaine, CNRS

Xavier Paulès received his PhD in Modern Chinese History at Lyon 2 University, France, in 2005. He has been Associate Professor at École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (Paris) since March 2010. His work has mainly been on Republican period opium, with a special focus on the consumption side. He has published many articles about opium and two books: Histoire d'une drogue en sursis. L'opium à Canton 1906-1936 [A drug in decline. Opium in Canton, 1906-1936] (Paris: éditions de l'EHESS, 2010, 333 pages) and L'opium, une passion chinoise, 1750-1950 [Opium, a Chinese Passion, 1750-1950] (Paris: Payot, 2011, 318 pages). His current research interests include the story of gambling, fantan in particular.



GLENN TIFFERTUC Berkeley

Glenn D. Tiffert is a doctoral candidate in History at the University of California, Berkeley. His doctoral dissertation historicizes PRC legal reform initiatives between 1949 and 1957 against the backdrop of local legal culture, modernization, and mid-century trends in Chinese social and intellectual history. His research interests focus on the PRC, and on the post-imperial Chinese legal system.



WANG CHAOGUANGInstitute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Science

Wang Chaoguang, professor and vice director of the Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Science. He received his PH.D on modern Chinese history from Fudan University (Shanghai), and research mainly on the history of the Republic of China, with a special focus on the Beiyang period (1912-1924) and the civil war period (1945-49). He is the author of The History of the Republic of China, vols. 4 and 11 (Beijing: Zhonghua Book House, 2011), The General History of Modern China, vols. 6 and 10 (Nanjing: Jiangsu People's Publishing House, 2006), 1945-1949: Rivalry of KMT-CCP and the Fate of China (Beijing: Social Science Document Publishing House, 2010) and lots of papers on the relative subjects in Historical Studies, Modern Historical Studies, The Journal of Modern Chinese History and so on. He was once visiting scholar to Columbia University and Stanford University of America, Bergen University of Norway, Kyoto University and Chuo University of Japan, Silla University of South Korea, Academia Sinica of Taiwan.



WEN-HSIN YEHWalter and Elise Haas Chair Professor in Asian Studies; Richard H. and Laurie C. Morrison Chair in History; Director, Institute of East Asian Studies, UC Berkeley

Wen-hsin Yeh is Walter and Elise Haas Chair Professor in Asian Studies and Richard H. and Laurie C. Morrison Chair in History. She is also an Honorary Professor of History at Peking University. She has served as Director of the Institute of East Asian Studies since January 2007. A leading authority on 20th century Chinese history, Yeh is author or editor of eleven books and numerous articles examining aspects of Republican history, Chinese modernity, the origins of communism and related subjects. Her work has been supported by numerous prestigious extramural and UC awards, including an ACLS Senior Scholar Fellowship, a Freeman Foundation grant, a multi-year Chiang Ching-kuo Senior Scholar Research Fellowship, as well as the UC President's Humanities Research Fellowship. Her books include the Berkeley Prize-winning Provincial Passages: Culture, Space, and the Origins of Chinese Communism (University of California Press, 1996) and The Alienated Academy: Culture and Politics in Republican China, 1919-1937 (Harvard University, 1990). Her most recent publication, Shanghai Splendor (University of California Press, 2007) is an urban history of Shanghai that considers the nature of Chinese capitalism and middle-class society in a century of contestation between colonial power and nationalistic mobilization.



JIN YILINInstitute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

Jin Yilin, professor and vice director of the Institute of Modern History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. He received his PH.D on modern Chinese history from National University of Singapore, and study mainly on the history of the Republic of China especially on the history of the KMT. His books include The Study on Universities of Modern China (Beijing: Central Document Publishing House, 2000), Factional Politics in the High Level of the KMT (Beijing: Social Science Document Publishing House, 2009). He was once visiting scholar to Silla University of South Korea, Academia Sinica and National Chengchi University of Taiwan.



MARGHERITA ZANASILouisiana State University

Margherita Zanasi is an Associate Professor of History at Louisiana State University. She received her M.A. and Ph.D. in History from Columbia University's History Department and her undergraduate degree from the University of Florence. Her interest is in Modern Chinese History, with special focus on nation building and national identity, economic thought, and memory. Zanasi published Saving the Nation: Economic Modernity in Republican China (Chicago: Univeristy of Chicago Press) in 2006, and currently has a manuscript in preparation, "Minsheng ( ): Livelihood and Consumption in Modern China."

DIRECTIONS

Directions

The conference — Law, Politics and Society in Republican China: Chinese and Western Perspectives in Comparison — will be held at the Institute of East Asian Studies – 2223 Fulton Street, 6th floor conference room

See section D1 on this large campus map.

IEAS


Directions to the Berkeley campus
By BART

If traveling by BART, exit the Richmond-Fremont line at the Berkeley station (not North Berkeley). When you leave the BART station, walk east up Center Street (towards the hills) one block.

From Interstate 80

To reach the campus by car from Interstate 80, exit at the University Avenue off-ramp in Berkeley. Take University Avenue east (toward the hills) approximately two miles until you reach the campus.

From Highways 24/13

To reach the campus from Highways 24/13, exit 13 at Tunnel Road in Berkeley. Continue on Tunnel Road as it becomes Ashby. Turn right at College Avenue and drive approximately one mile north to Bancroft Way.

Directions to the campus are also available at www.berkeley.edu/ visitors/ traveling.html

Parking

There are various public parking lots and facilities near campus and in downtown Berkeley. This list includes municipal and privately owned parking lots and garages open to the public. Please consult signs for hours and fees prior to entering the facilities.

More information is available on the UC Berkeley Parking and Transportation page.