Concentrated corporate power and failures to manage the distribution of risk mean that workers bear the heaviest burden in globalised apparel supply chains. Law and associated normative frameworks seek to strengthen collective worker voice and other worker rights to tip the scales of unequal bargaining power to benefit the workers. However, some of the traditional tools of labour law such as unionising and collective bargaining have weakened over the years and exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a conceptual framework based on regulatory theory, feminist insights, and semi-autonomous social fields, this article examines the law-practice gap for regulating just wages within the apparel supply chain, responses, and how workers fight wage theft and carve out pathways to demand just wage standards. Drawing from the case of Sri Lanka, the article discusses how alternative forms of worker voice seek to fill in the implementation gaps. The findings of this study demonstrate worker initiatives to shape the regulation of just wages and how networked labour activism, especially by women workers, prompts to re-imagine structures of actor accountability on wage rights.

The omnipresence of change has been singled out as posing an important challenge to law, both in theory and in practice, throughout its history. Arguably, the most efficient method of adapting the law to constant changes is legal education. Recent changes in the global arena have added to the complexity of the expected role of future legal talents, requiring them to acquire not only a profound knowledge of local and global laws but also a variety of legal as well as non-legal skills. This article presents some of the principal challenges faced by law schools and legal education in the world of today. These challenges are then explored using the example of a new Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.) degree programme in Chinese Law and Global Legal Studies in the English Language that will be offered by the Faculty of Law of the University of Macau in Macao, China.

Prosecutors in adversarial systems are simultaneously expected to be impartial ministers of justice and partisan advocates. Leaving this tension unaddressed can result in poor-quality prosecutorial decision-making. This article develops a novel “dynamic” framework for prosecutors to navigate between and prioritize these competing considerations, which can be used to understand, evaluate, and improve prosecutorial performance. Under this framework, the prioritization should depend on which function the prosecutor is exercising at any given time. The article then deploys primary data collected in Delhi, through court observation and interviews with judges, lawyers, victims, and victim-support persons, to exemplify and justify the framework.

The consumption of shaojiu or distilled liquor played a significant role in Qing legal culture and contributed to a rise in alcohol-related crimes. Qing officials’ attitudes towards intoxication not only influenced their judgments on many cases, but also reflected important trends of popular beliefs, notions, and practices that constituted shared knowledge and feelings between ordinary people and judges. This paper examines the transformation of Qing judicial practices and concerns regarding alcohol intoxication and crimes, arguing that specific cultural value and ideas that underpinned the public configuration of drinking behaviour during the Qing period contributed to a social pathology around intoxication. Due to the lack of a consistent interpretation of the effects of alcohol on the mind, early Qing officials tended to be lenient towards intoxicated offenders. However, mid-Qing law-makers and rulers recognized the serious administrative concerns associated with heavy drinking and began to conceptualize it as a serious social problem.

In Hong Kong, the percentage of older drug users has increased over the last two decades. However, the motivations behind their drug-use behaviours have received little research attention. This study focuses on older drug users who are enrolled in methadone treatment programmes but still use illicit drugs (mixed use). Some studies in the criminological literature and government discourse consider drug users to be passive and lacking self-control. However, in-depth interviews in with 25 older mixed users (aged over 50 years) in Hong Kong revealed that mixed use is one of the various strategies they actively employ to improve their self-perceived quality of life. Using the framework of the selective optimization with compensation model, this study (1) describes the strategies older mixed users adopt as active agents to improve their self-perceived quality of life while coexisting with their addiction; and (2) explains how these strategies were affected and constrained by Hong Kong’s prohibitionist drug policy. I infer that prohibitionist drug policies that emphasize on total drug abstinence may fail to cater to the needs of older drug users who have undergone several relapses and treatments in their lifetimes and do not think they can give up using drugs. This study also provides evidence to show how some drug users may act as active agents to manage and coexist with their addiction, and their agency seems to be constrained by the wider drug policy implemented in Hong Kong.

Empirical work consistently finds that Chinese courts resolve civil cases by finding a compromise solution. But beyond this split-it-down-the-middle tendency, when and how do Chinese courts arrive at decisions that feel “fair and just” in cases in which they invoke those ideas? Drawing on a data set of 9,485 tort cases, we find that Chinese courts impose liability on two types of parties with ethical, but not legal, obligation to victims: (1) participants in a shared activity and (2) those who control a physical space. In these cases, Chinese courts stretch the law to spread losses through communities and to acknowledge traumatic harm. Considering fairness, then, returns Chinese courts to their long-standing role as managers of communities who respond to misfortune by assigning legal responsibility to relationships that range from intimate to surprisingly tenuous.

A prevalent assumption is that digital legal databases generate an exhaustive and inclusive archive for academics and legal professionals to use for gathering information. Bridging theories and methods from digital media studies and legal anthropology, I challenge this assumption and demonstrate how digitizing law is a politicized process that is tied to legacies of colonialism and modern epistemic frameworks of law and justice. Employing the concept of legal pluralism, I conduct a comparative study of urban secular state courts and rural Islamic/customary non-state courts (shalish) in Bangladesh to show how the construction of digital legal databases distorts and erases alternate frameworks of law and women’s socio-legal experiences. I discuss two significant use of digital legal databases to highlight why it is important to study the gaps and prejudices: (1) they are central to generating new forms of archives—digital archives; (2) they provide the data sets to help train artificial intelligence and influence automated outputs. I develop the term “neocolonial digitality” to explain how power related to legacies of colonialism and other forms of discrimination are embedded in the digitizing process. This concept also holds space for the newer forms of hierarchies, exclusions, and power structures that digitality permits, focusing on the particular harms marginalized communities encounter in the Global South.

This article examines how smart courts enhance the reform of judicial responsibility and the “trial supervision and management” mechanism. It holds that smart courts, while meant to provide better judicial services and improve access to justice, have the additional goal of enhancing the restructuring of accountability and power structures. It argues that automation and digitization help institutionalize and codify political supervision. Smart courts help resolve tension between the two opposing requirements of Chinese courts to maintain legal rationality and independent adjudication on the one hand, and the need for flexibility to allow intervention on the other. This article provides an account of the automation of “trial supervision and management” and explores the role of technology in enhancing political intervention in China’s legal system. This investigation draws on internal court reports and central and local judicial documents, supplemented with a review of Chinese empirical scholarship.

This article presents a theory of the order of power to explain the dynamics and interaction between the political and legal orders in China’s courts. This theory posits that the political order is embodied in the extensive administrative ranking system (ARS) of the People’s Republic of China and has a systematic impact on the legal order regardless of the subject matter. The ARS is a system that regulates power relations between various institutional and personal actors in all key power fields, including courts. According to this theory, power, as stratified by the ARS, relativizes law during the processes of legal implementation, application, and enforcement. This theory provides a coherent explanation of judicial behavioural patterns in different subject matters, such as the centralization of criminal investigations in some crimes but not others, the distribution of corruption in China’s courts, and the outcome patterns of administrative litigation. Whilst the conventional wisdom sees that the political and the legal orders in China’s courts are partitioned based on the subject matter, this theory asserts the opposite: the impact of the political order is systemic, comprehensive, and applicable to the entire legal field. This article fills a knowledge gap in Chinese law and politics, where the ARS has received little attention except for recent studies on administrative litigation. The article also identifies two overlooked but distinctive features of the ARS—its multidimensionality and interconnectivity—our understanding of which is disproportionately poor in relation to their significance.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and big data are transforming the credit market around the world. Algorithmic credit scoring (ACS) is increasingly used to assess borrowers’ creditworthiness, using technology to glean non-traditional data from smartphones and analyze them through machine-learning algorithms. These processes promise efficiency, accuracy, and cost-effectiveness compared with traditional credit scoring. However, this technology raises public concerns about opacity, unfair discrimination, and threats to individual privacy and autonomy. Many countries in Southeast Asia are introducing ACS in consumer finance markets, although—even with the significant concerns raised—there is an ongoing and concerning lag in oversight and regulation of the process. Regulation is vital to delivering big data and AI promises in the financial services market, while ensuring fairness and public interest. This article utilizes Vietnam, where the lending industry deploys ACS but in a situation of legal limbo, as a case-study to analyze the consequences of this technology. Vietnam is one of the foremost Southeast Asian countries in which ACS usage is spreading rapidly, and this provides an excellent opportunity to review the regulation, or lack thereof, and determine the implications that this may have for other countries that are currently introducing ACS in consumer finance markets. The article concludes with a proposal to regulate ACS in Vietnam based on international regulation and guidelines on ACS, data privacy, and AI to enable a transparent, accessible, and fair process.

Independent directors (IDs) in listed Japanese companies have gradually increased with the transplant of the Western model of the monitoring board. In practice, however, IDs act more like the mediating hierarch in team production theory than the agent of the shareholders, albeit with a number of differences from Blair and Stout’s seminal model. Japanese IDs mediate formally and informally, resolving vertical disputes between groups of executives as they contest control of the company. Given the norm of lifetime employment, such vertical disputes are common in Japanese companies and are economically significant, since failure to resolve them can result in destruction of firm-specific human capital. The article explores the scope for mediating hierarchy in Japanese law and corporate governance practice, then develops three case-studies which highlight the role played by IDs. Their practice is shaped by and supports social norms that emphasize the importance of continuity in team production.

The world can no longer deny that the planet is on the verge of an Anthropocene catastrophe. As scientists from different fields and from around the globe are discussing the causes, impacts, challenges, and solutions to the arrival of this human-induced new geological time, the field of law cannot remain behind. Rights of Nature (RoN), granting legal personhood to nature and its elements such as rivers, is an emerging transnational legal framework fast gaining international traction among Euro-American legal scholars as a new tool to combat environmental destruction. Grounded in reflections derived from long-term collaborative ethnographic work among indigenous communities, this article aims to critically and empirically unpack several interrelated concerns and blind spots at this moment of the RoN snowballing effect around the globe related to claims that this new legal proposal is rooted in indigenous lifestyles and views about nature/the environment.

This article investigates the Bangladeshi garment industry that supplies ready-made garments for global brands and the corporate social responsibilities (CSRs) of the brands/multinational corporations (MNCs) towards their supply chains. Although outsourcing and global trade have boosted the living standards of many people in the Bangladeshi garment industry, there are some significant concerns regarding the working conditions and treatment of workers in these supply chains. This, in turn, cannot, and should not, be detached from the legal relationship between the Bangladeshi supply chains and the MNCs contracting with them. This article examines the impact of COVID-19, which has exposed the fragility and the pre-existing flaws in the relationship between the MNCs and their suppliers more clearly than at any other time in history. There is a huge governance gap between MNCs and supply chains that needs to be addressed urgently. This article assesses the legality of the cancellation of orders by the brands that invoked the force majeure clause. In doing so, this paper briefly deals with the responses of three American retail companies, namely Sears, Kohl’s, and the Arcadia Group, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. It illustrates that the power asymmetry between the MNCs and their suppliers has put the supply chains in an unreasonably disadvantageous position, creating unfair and even unconscionable conduct by several MNCs. This article also looks at solutions for the existing problems, focusing, inter alia, on non-financial reporting requirements in the US and the EU to implement CSR in supply chains. However, disappointingly, the authors had to conclude that MNCs typically have the propensity to disregard CSR, whenever it is convenient for them and use CSR for mere “greenwashing” purposes for their strategic benefit only. It is a problem that requires constant attention and continuing research to find long-term solutions. The article employs doctrinal methodology and, by conducting a meta-analysis of literature and case-studies, it provides a comprehensive understanding of how the industry works.

Article 28G(2) in Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution reflects a human rights approach to asylum; it guarantees “the right to obtain political asylum from another country,” together with freedom from torture. It imposes an obligation upon the state to give access to basic rights to those to whom it offers asylum, following an appropriate determination procedure. By contrast, in Presidential Regulation No. 125 of 2016 concerning the Treatment of Refugees, the Indonesian government’s response to asylum seekers and refugees is conceptualized as “humanitarian assistance,” and through a politicized and securitized immigration-control approach. We argue that the competition between these three approaches—the human right to asylum, humanitarianism, and immigration control—constitutes a “triangulation” of asylum and refugee protection in Indonesia, in which the latter two prevail. In light of this framework, this article provides a socio-political and legal analysis of why Article 28G(2) has not been widely accepted as the basis of asylum and refugee protection in Indonesia.

In this paper, I want to focus on some aspects of the political process in India that have an impact on the treatment of religious minorities. Much of the discussion on multicultural jurisdictions deals with differentiated citizenship rights that allow religious groups to maintain their normative universe. This literature shows the tensions surrounding individual and group rights. I want to approach the question of religious freedom from a rather different angle. I want to first focus on the protection of bare life in the face of religious violence and then examine the issue of conversion from one religion to another. The issues of human security and conversion are linked in India, since Hindu nationalists see Muslims as forcibly converted Hindus who should be reconverted. To highlight the importance of majoritarian nationalism rather than political systems in the treatment of religious minorities, I offer a brief comparison with China.

This article analyzes the ambitious Case Quality Assessment System (CQAS) that the Supreme People’s Court of China (SPC) promoted during the first half of the 2010s. It offers a case-study of Court J, a grassroots court located in an affluent urban metropolis of China that struggled to come out ahead in the CQAS competition. The article discusses how the SPC quantified judging and the problems created by the metricization process. The CQAS project is analyzed as a case of metric fixation. By identifying the problems that doomed the CQAS, the article points out the challenges facing the authoritarian regime in subjecting good judging to quantitative output standards. The CQAS is a metric that judges judging. It reveals how judging is viewed by the party-state. The article concludes by discussing the legacy of the CQAS. Though it nominally ended in 2014, key indicators that it introduced for supervising judges are still used by the Chinese courts today. The CQAS presaged the growing centralization that the Chinese judicial system is undergoing today. Though the SPC has terminated the tournament-style competition that defined the CQAS, the metric remains the template used to evaluate judging.

The singularity of artificial intelligence (AI), which transcends human intelligence to play the role of God, is imminent. In this context, the Chinese judicial system has gained some latecomer advantage, with the help of information technology, the Internet, big data, cloud computing, and AI to improve the efficiency and transparency of case handling. The trial process has undergone extensive and profound qualitative mutations. This represents a challenge to the institutional arrangements of the modern rule of law. At this stage, we should adopt a cautious and prudent attitude towards the design and application of legal-expert systems as well as machine learning. Especially from the aspect of computer sentencing, it is even more necessary to avoid a rush for quick results, and there is no need to completely exclude the judge’s discretion and free evaluation of the evidence through inner conviction. The finality of the judicial power is destined to choose a correct final solution through a debate on the survival of the fittest mechanism. In the face of such a modern rule-of-law system, big data, cloud computing, information technology, and AI are just auxiliary means to achieve legal justice. It is impossible to put the cart before the horses. This is a basic principle that we should always bear in mind.

Due to their success in routine tasks such as voice recognition, image classification, and text processing, extensive attention has been aroused on how to use artificial intelligence (AI)-based automation tools in the judicial-trial process to improve efficiency. Meanwhile, judicial trial is a complex task that requires accurate insight and subtle analysis of the cases, law, and common knowledge. Applying the results provided by AI-based automation tools directly to the judicial-trial process is controversial due to their irregular logic and low accuracy. Based on this observation, this article investigates the logic underlined in judicial trials and the technical characteristics of AI, and proposes an AI-based semantic assist approach for judicial trials that is logical and transparent to the judges.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and law is an AI research area that has a history spanning more than 50 years. In the early stages, several legal-expert systems were developed. Legal-expert systems are tools designed to realize fair judgments in court. In addition to this research, as information and communication technologies and AI technologies have progressed, AI and law has broadened its view from legal-expert systems to legal analytics and, recently, a lot of machine-learning and text-processing techniques have been employed to analyze legal information. The research trends are the same in Japan as well and not only people involved with legal-expert systems, but also those involved with natural language processing as well as lawyers have become interested in AI and law. This report introduces the history of and the research activities on applying AI to the legal domain in Japan.

As the growing number of cases is draining the limited court resources in China, how to scientifically measure the reasonable saturated workload of judges has become an urgent issue. This issue is the prerequisite of other important topics such as determination of judges’ quotas, measurement of the actual workload of a trial team, performance evaluation of judges, and resource allocation within courts. Data-driven measurement of the actual workload of China’s judges depends on various factors such as local economic development, public transportation, case-load in the past, and staffing of assistant positions. Therefore, traditional approaches that depend only on a single element, such as cause of action, do not work well. We proposed a modelling framework based on big-data and machine-learning technology to more accurately measure the actual workload of judges. This framework extracts the core elements of judicial cases, assigns target workload to the cases based on feedback from judges and analyzing case samples to create a standard training dataset, and trains machine-learning models using the data. A preliminary case-weight calculation model is built using the framework. Besides, the model is continuously evaluated and improved by comparing its output with the actual demand in a court through methods such as sampling, questionnaires, and expert evaluation.