No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 February 2014
This article seeks to address China’s entrenched censorship regime in the constitutionalist dimension of international law. First, the article probes into China’s censorship regime and the way it is linked to the country’s foreign policies. Second, the article explores the tension between China’s national censorship regime and international law. Such tension is rendered sharper than ever in the context of fragmented international law, as exemplified by two UPRs of China and two WTO rulings. Finally, the article advances a constitutionalist premise that eventually China’s self-motivated step into the fragmented domain of international law could boomerang against China’s censorship regime. As the international standards of freedom of expression are evolving into a fundamental right with constitutional status, the functional interrelatedness between different subsystems of international law gives rise to the accountability of state actors, which in turn compels them to comply with universal rules.
1 Xinhua Daily, 19 April 1944.
2 Dr J Solana, ‘Securing Peace in Europe, Secretary General of North Atlantic Treaty Organization’, Speech at the Symposium on the Political Relevance of the 1648 Peace of Westphalia (12 November 1998).
3 Shelley, MW, Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus: the Original Two-Volume Novel of 1816–1817 from the Bodleian Library Manuscripts (Bodleian Library, Oxford, 2008) 190.Google Scholar
4 For instance, these reports are often summarized in the legal documents of the United Nations Human Rights Council [UNHRC]. UNHRC, Compilation Prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in Accordance with Paragraph 15(B) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 5/1, paras 27–29, UN Doc A/HRC/WG.6/4/CHN/2 (16 December 2008) [OHCHR Compilation I]; UNHRC, Compilation Prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in Accordance with Paragraph 15(B) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 5/1 and Paragraph 5 of the Annex to Council Resolution 16/21, paras 34–42, UN Doc A/HRC/WG.6/17/CHN/2 (7 August 2013) [OHCHR Compilation II]; UNHRC, Summary Prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in Accordance with Paragraph 15(C) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 5/1, paras 29–32, UN Doc A/HRC/WG.6/4/CHN/3 (5 January 2009) [OHCHR Summary I]. UNHRC, Summary Prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in Accordance with Paragraph 15(B) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 16/21, paras 37–45, UN Doc A/HRC/WG.6/17/CHN/3 (30 July 2013) [OHCHR Summary II].
5 XQ Yang, ‘A Comparative Study of Constitutionalism and People’s Democratic Dictatorship’ (2013) 2013: 10 Red Flag Essays; ‘Constitutionalism Denies China’s Road of Development’, Global Times, 12 May 2013; Zheng, ZX, ‘Recognizing the Essence of Constitutionalism’, Party Building, 29 May 2013.Google Scholar
6 Buckley, C, ‘China Takes Aim at Western Ideas’, New York Times, 19 August 2013, available at <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/20/world/asia/chinas-new-leadership-takes-hard-line-in-secret-memo.html?_r=0> accessed 10 December 2013.Google Scholar
7 Sceats, S with Breslin, S, China and the International Human Rights System (Chatham House, London, October 2012) 3–6.Google Scholar
8 UNHRC, Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review China, UN Doc A/HRC/11/25 (5 October 2009) [UPR China I]. UNHRC, Draft Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review China, UN Doc A/HRC/WG.6/17/L.3 (24 October 2013) [UPR China II].
9 UPR I (n 8) paras 38, 82–84, 92. UPR China II (n 8) paras 98, 116, 119, 166, 168, 176.135–7, 176.150–6, 176.158–9, 176.176, 176.229.
10 UPR I (n 8) para 71.
11 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted 16 December 1966, GA Res 2200 (XXI), UN GAOR, 21st Sess, Supp No 16, at 52, UN Doc A/6316 (1966), 999 UNTS 171, entered into force 23 March 1976 [ICCPR].
12 UPR China II (n 8) para 88.
13 As of November 2013, China has had a profile of 11 cases as complainant, 31 cases as respondent, and 102 cases in which China is a third party. WTO, Disputes by country, available at <http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_by_country_e.htm> accessed 10 December 2013.
14 WTO Panel Report, China–Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, WTO Doc WT/DS362/R (26 January 2009) [China–IPR].
15 Ibid paras 2.2–4.
16 WTO Panel Report, China–Measures Affecting Trading Rights and Distribution Services for Certain Publications and Audiovisual Entertainment Products, WTO Doc WT/DS363/R (12 August 2009) [China–Publications].
17 WTO Appellate Body Report, China–Measures Affecting Trading Rights and Distribution Services for Certain Publications and Audiovisual Entertainment Products, WTO Doc WT/DS363/AB/R (21 December 2009) [AB Report].
18 M Koskenniemi, Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission, Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, UN Doc A/CN.4/L. 682 (13 April 2006) 3–4.
19 Liebman, BL, ‘Watchdog or Demagogue: The Media in the Chinese Legal System’ (2005) 105 Columbia Law Review 1.Google Scholar
20 Petersmann, E-U, ‘The WTO Constitution and Human Rights’; (2000) 3 Journal of International Economic Law 20.Google Scholar
21 Schwöbel, CEJ, Global Constitutionalism in International Legal Perspective (Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, 2011) 32–3.Google Scholar
22 Dunoff, JL, ‘Why Constitutionalism Now? Text, Context and Historical Contingency of Ideas’ (2005) 1 Journal of International Law and International Relations 195.Google Scholar
23 Qin, JY, ‘Pushing the Limits of Global Governance: Trading Rights, Censorship and WTO Jurisprudence—A Commentary on the China—Publications Case’ (2011) 10 Chinese Journal of International Law 271Google Scholar; Ting, M, ‘The Role of the WTO in Limiting China’s Censorship Policies’ (2011) 41Hong Kong Law Journal 285Google Scholar. Wright, C, ‘Censoring the Censors in the WTO: Reconciling the Communitarian and Human Rights Theories of International Law’ (2010) 3 Journal of International Media and Entertainment Law 17Google Scholar; Pauwelyn, J, ‘Squaring Free Trade in Culture with Chinese Censorship: The WTO Appellate Body Report on China–Audiovisuals’ (2010) 11 Melbourne Journal of International Law 119.Google Scholar
24 Chalmers, D, ‘Administrative Globalization and Curbing the Excesses of the State’ in Joerges, C and Petersmann, E-U (eds), Constitutionalism, Multilevel Trade Governance and International Economic Law (Hart, Oxford, 2011) 351, 362–4.Google Scholar
25 Paulus, AL, ‘From Territoriality to Functionality? Towards a Legal Methodology of Globalization’ in Dekker, IF and Werner, WG (eds), Governance and International Legal Theory (Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, 2004) 59.Google Scholar
26 Liebman (n 19) 46–56. ASY Cheung, ‘Exercising Freedom of Speech behind the Great Firewall: A Study of Judges’ and Lawyers’ Blogs in China’ (2011) 52 Harvard International Law Journal Online 250, 262–5.
27 Peerenboom, R, ‘Assessing Human Rights in China: Why the Double Standard?’ (2005) 38 Cornell International Law Journal 71, 78–84, 113–14.Google Scholar
28 The Constitution of the PRC, ch 1, art 5 (2004); Wang, M, ‘Human Rights Lawmaking in China: Domestic Politics, International Law, and International Politics’ (2007) 29 Human Rights Quarterly 727, 733–8.Google Scholar
29 Ibid art 33(3).
30 OHCHR, Handbook on National Human Rights Plans of Action (2002) paras 3.1–2.
31 Information Office of China’s State Council (IOCSC), NHRAP, 13 April 2009 available at <http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/news/Focus/2009-04/14/content_1497609.htm> accessed 10 December 2013. IOCSC, NHRAP 2012–2015, 11 June 2012, available at <http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2012-06-11/152524573325.shtml> accessed 10 December 2013.
32 The Constitution of the PRC (n 28) arts 35, 47.
33 Ibid arts 51–54.
34 The Four Cardinal Principles include the leadership of the CCP, the people’s democratic dictatorship, the socialist road, the guidance of Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory and the thought of ‘Three Represents’. Ibid preamble para 7.
35 Angle, SC, ‘Human Rights and Harmony’ (2008) 30 Human Rights Quarterly 76.Google Scholar
36 The SPC was authorized to issue judicial interpretations in legal practice. The Standing Committee of the People’s Congress, Resolution of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress Providing an Improved Interpretation of the Law, June 10, 1981 at the nineteenth Meeting of the Standing Committee of the Fifth National People’s Congress, art 2.
37 The SPC made such opinions clear in two documents in 1955 and 1986. M Jihong, ‘The Constitutional Law of the People’s Republic of China and Its Development’ 23 (2009) Columbia Journal of Asian Law 137, 174–5.
38 Kellogg, TE, ‘Constitutionalism with Chinese Characteristics? Constitutional Development and Civil Litigation in China’ (2009) 7 International Journal of Constitutional Law 215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39 OHCHR Compilation I (n 4) para 24; OHCHR Summary I (n 4) para 23. OHCHR Summary II (n 4) para 32.
40 Tomuschat, Cf C, Human Rights between Idealism and Realism (Oxford University Press [OUP], Oxford, 2008) 89.Google Scholar
41 The Law of the PRC on Legislation, arts 56 and 71 (2000).
42 Qi, Zhou, ‘Conflicts over Human Rights between China and the US’ (2005) 27 Human Rights Quarterly 105, 118.Google Scholar
43 E.g., Regulations on the Administration of Movies, art 25 (2001) [RAM]; Regulations on Broadcasting and Television Administration, art 32 (1997) [RBTA]; Provisions for the Administration of Internet News Information Services, art 19 (2005) [PAINIS].
44 Regulations on the Administration of Publication, art 26 (2011) [RAP].
45 The complete statement of the functions of the Publicity Department is outlined on its homepage, see <http://cpc.people.com.cn/GB/64114/75332/5230610.html> accessed 10 December 2013.
46 Liebman (n 19) 43–6.
47 Committee to Protect Journalists, Falling Short: As the 2008 Olympics Approach, China Falters on Press Freedom, A Special Report of the Committee to Protect Journalists (New York, August 2007) 25.Google Scholar
48 Bennett, I, ‘Media Censorship in China’, Council on Foreign Relations (7 March 2010), available at <http://www.cfr.org/china/media-censorship-china/p11515> accessed 10 December 2013.Google Scholar
49 King, G, Pan, J and Roberts, M, ‘How Censorship in China Allows Government Criticism but Silences Collective Expression’ (2013) 107(2) American Political Science Review 326, 327.Google Scholar
50 RAP (n 44) arts 9–19.
51 RAM (n 43) arts 8–23; RBTA (n 43) arts 8–16.
52 PAINIS (n 43) arts 4 and 5.
53 Regulation on Internet Information Service, art 7 (2000) [RIIS].
54 Regulations on the Administration of Business Sites of Internet Access Services, art 4 (2002) [RABSIAS].
55 Measures for Security Protection Administration of the International Networking of Computer Information Networks, art 3 (1997) [MSPAINCIN].
56 Regulation on News Coverage by Resident Offices of Foreign News Agencies and Foreign Correspondents, arts 5–10 (2008).
57 PAINIS (n 43) art 9.
58 Several Opinions of the Ministry of Culture, State Administration of Radio, Film and Television, General Administration of Press and Publication, National Development and Reform Commission and the Ministry of Commerce on Canvassing Foreign Investment into the Cultural Sector, art 10 (2005).
59 Provisional Regulation on Investment in Cinemas by Foreign Investors, arts 3 and 4 (2003); Provisions Regarding the Administration of the Establishment by Overseas Institutions of Administrative Offices for Radio and Television in China, arts 3 and 4 (2004).
60 Kissel, TK, ‘License to Blog: Internet Regulation in the People’s Republic of China’ (2007) 17 Indiana International and Comparative Law Review 229, 233–45.Google Scholar
61 Stevenson, C, ‘Breaching the Great Firewall: China’s Internet Censorship and the Quest for Freedom of Expression in a Connected World’ (2007) 30 British Columbia International and Comparative Law Review 531, 537–44.Google Scholar
62 RIIS (n 53) arts 7–10, 18.
63 MSPAINCIN (n 55) arts 15–19.
64 Deva, S, ‘Corporate Complicity in Internet Censorship in China: Who Cares for the Global Compact or the Global Online Freedom Act?’ (2007) 39 George Washington International Law Review 255.Google Scholar
65 Measures for the Administration of Internet E-mail Services, arts 6–11 (2006).
66 RABSIAS (n 54) arts 14 and 23.
67 Amnesty International, Undermining Freedom of Expression in China: The Role of Yahoo!, Microsoft and Google (AI Index POL 30/026/2006, July 2006) 26.
68 Human Rights Watch, Race to the Bottom: Corporate Complicity in Chinese Internet Censorship (HRW Index No C 1808, 10 August 2006) 9–11.
69 Ibid 12–13.
70 King, Pan and Roberts (n 49) 328.
71 Scotton, JF and Hachten, WA, New Media for a New China (Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, 2010) 4.Google Scholar
72 King, Pan and Roberts (n 49) 334–7.
73 Land, Cf M, ‘Toward an International Law of the Internet’ (2013) 54 Harvard International Law Journal 393, 396–407.Google Scholar
74 Cheung, ASY, ‘Public Opinion Supervision: A Case Study of Media Freedom in China’ (2007) 20 Columbia Journal of Asian Law 357, 380–4.Google Scholar
75 RAP (n 44) art 20.
76 Yardley, J, ‘Chinese Journal Closed by Censors Is to Reopen’, New York Times (16 February 2006), available at <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/16/international/asia/16cnd-china.html?_r=2&oref=slogin> accessed 10 December 2013.Google Scholar
77 RAM (n 43) art 27.
78 RBTA (n 43) art 43.
79 PAINIS (n 43) art 23.
80 He, QL, The Fog of Censorship: Media Control in China (Human Rights in China, New York, Hong Kong and Brussels, 2008) 29–31 and 33–6.Google Scholar
81 RAP (n 44) art 25.
82 RAM (n 43) art 26; RBTA (n 43) art 33.
83 PAINIS (n 43) arts 3 and 20.
84 RAP (n 44) art 44.
85 RAM (n 43) art 31; RBTA (n 43) art 39.
86 Measures for the Administration of Release of News and Information in China by Foreign News Agencies, art 11 (2006).
87 Ibid art 12.
88 Song, J, ‘Guangdong Examines Municipal Officials on the Basis of Mass Incidents of over 100,000 Particpants’, 21st Century Economy Report (18 July 2013), available at <http://news.qq.com/a/20130718/001171.htm> accessed 10 December 2013.Google Scholar
89 Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on Several Issues concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Criminal Cases of Libels in Information Network, art 3 (6 September 2013).
90 Ibid.
91 Pils, E, ‘Asking the Tiger for His Skin: Rights Activism in China’ (2007) 30 Fordham International Law Journal 1209.Google Scholar
92 Ran, Y, ‘When Chinese Criminal Defense Lawyers Become the Criminals’ (2009) 32 Fordham International Law Journal 988.Google Scholar
93 Law of the PRC on Assemblies, Processions and Demonstrations, arts 7 and 12 (1989).
94 Regulation on Complaint Letters and Visits, arts 20 and 47 (2005).
95 Sino-US Agreement on High Energy Physics, 18 ILM 345 (1979). Sino-US Agreement on Trade Relations, 18 ILM 1041 (1979).
96 E.g., Zhao, J and Webster, T, ‘Taking Stock: China’s First Decade of Free Trade’ (2011) 33(1) University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 65, 66–8.Google Scholar
97 Suri, MV, ‘Conceptualizing China Within the Kantian Peace’ (2013) 54 Harvard International Law Journal 219, 246–51.Google Scholar
98 See, e.g., the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, art 27(3), available at <http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/i_property/pdfs/acta1105_en.pdf> accessed 10 December 2013; ZZ Chen, ‘Exploring the Limits of Investment Treaty Arbitration in Protecting Investors’ Speech-Related Rights: About Speech, about Business, or about the Business of Speech?’ (2010) 7(4) Transnational Dispute Management 1.
99 Cottier, T and Khorana, S, ‘Linkages between Freedom of Expression and Unfair Competition Rules in International Trade: The Hertel Case and Beyond’ in Cottier, T, Pauwelyn, J and Bürgi, E (eds), Human Rights and International Trade (OUP, Oxford, 2005) 270.Google Scholar
100 Broude, T and Shany, Y, ‘The International Law and Policy of Multi-Sourced Equivalent Norms’ in Broude, T and Shany, Y (eds), Multi-Sourced Equivalent Norms in International Law (Hart, Oxford, 2011) 1, 9–13.Google Scholar
101 Harland, C, ‘The Status of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in the Domestic Law of State Parties: An Initial Global Survey through UN Human Rights Committee Documents’ (2000) 22 Human Rights Quarterly 187.Google Scholar
102 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, art 29(3), 10 December 1948, GA Res 217A (III), UN GAOR, 3rd Sess (Resolutions, part 1), at 71, UN Doc A/810 (1948) [UDHR].
103 Bossuyt, MJ, Guide to the ‘Travaux Préparatoires’ of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, 1987) 398.Google Scholar
104 The other explicit restriction is respect for the rights or reputations of others. ICCPR (n 11) art 19(3).
105 E.g., L Alexander, Is There a Right of Freedom of Expression? (CUP, Cambridge, 2005) 111.
106 Case Concerning the Application of the Convention of 1902 Governing the Guardianship of Infants (Netherlands v Sweden), Separate Opinion of Judge Sir Hersch Lauterpacht, 1958 ICJ 79, 90 (November 28).
107 Human Rights Committee, Motta v Uruguay, Communication No 11/1977, UN Doc CCPR/C/OP/1/11/1977 (1984) para 17.
108 Nowak, M, UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: CCPR Commentary (Engel, Kehl, 2005) 460.Google Scholar
109 Human Rights Committee, Mpaka-Nsusu v Zaire, Communication No 157/1983, UN Doc Supp No 40 (A/41/40) at 142 (1986) para 10.
110 Human Rights Committee, De Morais v Angola, Communication No 1128/2002, UN Doc CCPR/ C/83/D/1128/2002 (2005) para 6.8.
111 Human Rights Committee, Mukong v Cameroon, Communication No 458/1991, UN Doc CCPR/C/51/D/458/1991 (1994), paras 9.6–9.7.
112 Human Rights Committee, General Comment No 34, UN Doc CCPR/C/GC/34, 12 September 2011.
113 Ibid paras 38–39.
114 Ibid paras 39–40, 43–44.
115 Ibid paras 42 and 49.
116 UNHRC, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Frank La Rue, UN Doc A/HRC/17/27, 16 May 2011, paras 29 and 35.
117 Ibid paras 31, 34 and 36.
118 Zaum, D, The Sovereignty Paradox: The Norms and Politics of International Statebuilding 230 (OUP, Oxford, 2007).Google Scholar
119 UNHRC, Resolution 5/1, Institution-building of the United Nations Human Rights Council, 18 June 2007, Annex, paras 3–38 [Resolution 5/1].
120 Ibid para 5(e).
121 Boyle, K, ‘The United Nations Human Rights Council: Origins, Antecedents, and Prospects’ in Boyle, K (ed), New Institutions for Human Rights Protection [New Institutions] (OUP, Oxford, 2009) 11, 14.Google Scholar
122 Resolution on the Human Rights Council, GA Res 60/251, UN GAOR, 60th Sess, UN Doc A/RES/60/251 (2006) [Resolution on HRC].
123 UNHRC, National Report Submitted in Accordance with Paragraph 15 (A) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 5/1 China, UN Doc A/HRC/WG.6/4/CHN/1, 10 November 2008 [National Report I]. UNHRC, National Report Submitted in Accordance with Paragraph 5 of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 16/21 China, UN Doc A/HRC/WG.6/17/CHN/1, 5 August 2013 [National Report II].
124 See n 4.
125 UPR China I (n 8) para 117.
126 Resolution 5/1 (n 119) para 1.
127 UPR China I (n 8) para 71.
128 National Report I (n 123) paras 90–91. National Report II (n 123) paras 11, 14, 19, 93.
129 OHCHR Summary I (n 4) para 32. OHCHR Summary II (n 4) paras 6–8, 12.
130 Bernaz, N, ‘Reforming the UN Human Rights Protection Procedures: A Legal Perspective on the Establishment of the Universal Periodic Review Mechanism’, in New Institutions (n 121) 75, 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
131 UN, A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility, Report of the Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change, para 283, UN Doc A/59/565 (2004).
132 Yang Jiechi, ‘Work in Cooperation for A New Chapter in the Cause of International Human Rights’, statement delivered during the High Level Segment at the 1st session of the Human Rights Council (20 June 2006), 3, available at <http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/statements/china.pdf> accessed 10 December 2013.
133 See, e.g., Zimbabwe’s comments in UPR China I (n 8) para 73.
134 See ‘Looking for Universality at China’s Second UPR’, International Relations, 5 November 2013, available at <http://duihua.org/wp/?p=8569> accessed 10 December 2013.
135 Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Dispute (DSU), art 17, Marrakesh, 15 April 1994, 33 ILM 1226 (1994).
136 Cf Qin (n 23) 273.
137 China–IPR (n 14) para 7.16.
138 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Marrakesh, 15 April 1994, 33 ILM 1197 (1994) [TRIPS].
139 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, 9 September 1886, as last revised at Paris on July 24, 1971, S Treaty Doc No 99–127 1161 UNTS 30 [the BC].
140 The Copyright Law of the PRC (2001).
141 TRIPS (n 138) art 9.1; the BC (n 139) art 5(1).
142 China–IPR (n 14) paras 7.21 and 7.56.
143 The regulations reviewed include RAP, RAM and RBTA. Ibid paras 7.72–103.
144 Ibid paras 7.51–7.
145 Ibid para 7.107.
146 Ibid paras 7.22 and 7.26.
147 TRIPS (n 138) art 9.1; the BC (n 139) art 17.
148 China–IPR (n 14) paras 7.18 and 7.120.
149 Ibid para 7.17.
150 Ibid para 7.144.
151 Ibid paras 7.127 and 7.132.
152 Protocol on the Accession of the PRC, WT/L/432, 10 November 2001.
153 Ibid paras 5.1 and 5.2; WTO, Report of the Working Party on the Accession of China, WT/MIN(01)/3 (10 November 2001) paras 83 and 84.
154 China–Publications (n 16) para 7.907–13.
155 GATT, art XX(a), 30 October 1947, in the version valid since 1 March 1969, UNTS 55, 94.
156 China–Publications (n 16) para 4.108.
157 Ibid para 4.114.
158 Ibid para 4.107.
159 Ibid para 7.746. Appellate Body Report, Brazil–Measures Affecting Imports of Retreated Tyers, WT/DS332/AB/R, 17 December 2007.
160 China–Publications (n 16) paras 7.756, 7.762–3.
161 Ibid para 7.760.
162 Pauwelyn (n 23) 133.
163 China–Publications (n 16) para 7.858.
164 Ibid para 7.899.
165 See n 162.
166 China–Publications (n 16) paras 7.886–909.
167 Mohamed Bedjaoui (Algeria), statement delivered during the High Level Segment at the first session of the Human Rights Council (21 June 2006), available at <http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/statements/algeria.pdf> accessed 10 December 2013.
168 Gaer, FD, ‘A Voice Not an Echo: Universal Periodic Review and the UN Treaty Body System’ (2007) 7 Human Rights Law Review 109, 135.Google Scholar
169 UPR China I (n 8) para 114, Nos 1, 10, 11.
170 Ibid para 114, No 34.
171 RAP (n 44) arts 41–43.
172 van Staden, A and Vollaard, H, ‘The Erosion of State Sovereignty: Towards a Post-Territorial World?’ in Kreijen, Get al. (eds), Sovereignty, and International Governance (OUP, Oxford, 2002) 165, 168.Google Scholar
173 Young, MA, Trading Fish, Saving Fish: The Interaction between Regimes in International Law (CUP, Cambridge, 2011) 9.Google Scholar
174 Franck, T, ‘The Centripede and the Centrifuge: Principles for the Centralisation and Decentralisation of Governance’ in Broude, T and Shany, Y (eds), The Shifting Allocation of Authority in International Law [Allocation of Authority] (Hart, Oxford, 2008) 19, 20–3.Google Scholar
175 Dunoff, JL, ‘The Politics of International Constitutions’ in Dunoff, JL and Trachtman, JP (eds), Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law, and Global Governance [Ruling the World] (CUP, Cambridge, 2009) 178, 185–92.Google Scholar
176 Pauwelyn, J, Conflict of Norms in Public International Law: How WTO Law Relates to Other Rules of International Law (CUP, Cambridge, 2008) 25.Google Scholar
177 Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 2: Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, art 3(2), 15 April 1994, ILM 33, 1226 (1994).
178 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, art 31, 23 May 1969, UN Doc A/CONF.39/27 (1969), 1155 UNTS 331 (27 January 1980), 8 ILM 679 (1969) [VCLT].
179 WTO Panel Report, United States–Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, para 129, WTO Doc WT/DS58/AB/R (12 October 1998).
180 E.g., Broude, T, ‘Fragmentation of International Law: On Normative Integration as Authority Allocation’ in Allocation of Authority (n 174) 99, 113.Google Scholar
181 WTO Appellate Body Report, Mexico–Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages, para 78, WT/DS308/AB/R (6 March 2006).
182 von Bogdandy, A, ‘The European Union as a Human Rights Organization? Human Rights and the Core of the European Union’ (2000) 37 Common Market Law Review 1307, 1337.Google Scholar
183 Dunoff (n 175) 187.
184 Pulkowski, D, ‘Structural Paradigms of International Law’ in Allocation of Authority (n 174) 51, 72.Google Scholar
185 Petersmann, E-U, ‘Time for a United Nations ‘‘Global Compact’’ for Integrating Human Rights into the Law of Worldwide Organizations: Lessons from European Integration’ (2002) 13 European Journal of International Law 621.Google Scholar
186 Sassen, S, Losing Control? Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization (Columbia University Press, New York and Chichester, 1996) 25.Google Scholar
187 Nollkaemper, A, National Courts and the International Rule of Law (OUP, Oxford, 2011) 222.Google Scholar
188 Kelsen, H, Pure Theory of Law (University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967) 221–2, 337–8.Google Scholar
189 Reisman, WM, ‘On the Causes of Uncertainty and Volatility in International Law’ in Allocation of Authority (n 174) 33, 44.Google Scholar
190 E.g., Goldsmith, JL and Posner, EA, The Limits of International Law (OUP, Oxford, 2005) 205.Google Scholar
191 Howse, R and Nicolaïdis, K, ‘Democracy without Sovereignty’ in Allocation of Authority (n 174) 163, 164.Google Scholar
192 Franck (n 174) 26.
193 E.g., Fassbender, B, ‘The United Nations Charter as the Constitution of the International Community’ (1998) 36 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 529.Google Scholar
194 Doyle, MW, ‘The UN Charter: A Global Constitution?’ in Ruling the World (n 175) 113, 114.Google Scholar
195 VCLT (n 178) art 53.
196 Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company Limited (Belgium v Spain), Second Phase, 1970 ICJ 3, 32 (February 5).
197 AL Paulus, ‘The International Legal System as a Constitution’, in Ruling the World (n 175) 69, 88–90 and 103.
198 Reisman (n 189) 39–40 and 43.
199 Pulkowski (n 184) 69–72.
200 Nagan, WP, and Hammer, C, ‘The Changing Character of Sovereignty in International Law and International Relations’ (2004) 43 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 141, 154.Google Scholar
201 Loughlin, M, ‘What is Constitutionalisation?’ in Dobner, P and Loughlin, M (eds), The Twilight of Constitutionalism? [Twilight of Constitutionalism] (OUP, Oxford, 2010) 47, 63–8.Google Scholar
202 Kumm, M, ‘The Cosmopolitan Turn in Constitutionalism’ in Ruling the World (n 175) 255, 263–4.Google Scholar
203 Nollkaemper (n 187) 117–20.
204 Espiell, G, ‘Sovereignty, Independence and Interdependence’ in Grahl-Madsen, A and Toman, J (eds), The Spirit of Uppsala, Proceedings of the Joint Unitar-Uppsala University Seminar on International Law and Organization for a New World Order (de Gruyter, Berlin, 1984) 277, 286.Google Scholar
205 United Nations Charter, arts 1(3), 55, 56, signed 26 June 1945, 59 Stat 1031, UNTS No 993, 3 Bevans 1153, entered into force 24 October 1945 [UN Charter].
206 Lauterpacht, H, International Law and Human Rights (Stevens, London, 1950) 148.Google Scholar
207 UDHR (n 102) art 22.
208 Simma, B and Alston, P, ‘The Sources of Human Rights Law: Custom, Jus Cogens, and General Principles’ (1988–89) 12 Australian Yearbook of International Law 82, 90–3 and 100.Google Scholar
209 Ferrajoli, L, ‘Beyond Sovereignty and Citizenship: A Global Constitutionalism’ in Bellamy, R (ed), Constitutionalism, Democracy and Sovereignty: American and European Perspectives (Avebury, Aldershot, 1996) 154.Google Scholar
210 Nollkaemper (n 187) 222–4.
211 Milanovic, M, Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties: Law, Principles, and Policy (OUP, Oxford, 2011) 232–5.Google Scholar
212 Salomon, ME, Global Responsibility for Human Rights: World Poverty and the Development of International Law (OUP, Oxford, 2007) 21–5.Google Scholar
213 Tomuschat, C, ‘International Law: Ensuring the Survival of Mankind on the Eve of a New Century’ (1999) 281 Recueil des Cours 23, 63.Google Scholar
214 Yarwood, L, State Accountability under International Law: Holding States Accountable for A Breach of Jus Cogens Norms (Routledge, London, 2011) 57 and 158.Google Scholar
215 Ibid 159.
216 Reus-Smit, C, The Moral Purpose of the State: Culture, Social Identity, and Institutional Rationality in International Relations (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1999) 127–9 and 159–61.Google Scholar
217 Gardbaum, S, ‘Human Rights and International Constitutionalism’ in Ruling the World (n 175) 233, 238–9.Google Scholar
218 Ibid 254–5.
219 Ibid 250; AK Woods, ‘A Behavioral Approach to Human Rights’ (2010) 51 Harvard International Law Journal 51, 100.
220 Reisman (n 189) 37.
221 This is the title of Rudolf von Jhering’s famous lecture at Vienna University in 1868.
222 Alston, P, ‘Resisting the Merger and Acquisition of Human Rights by Trade Law: A Reply to Petersmann’ (2002) 13 European Journal of International Law 815, 816.Google Scholar
223 Wet, E de, ‘The Emergence of International and Regional Value Systems as a Manifestation of the Emerging International Constitutional Order’ (2006) 19 Leiden Journal of International Law 611, 614–16.Google Scholar
224 Albertini Mason, B von, The Case for Liberal Democracy in China: Basic Human Rights, Confucianism and the Asian Values Debate (Schulthess, Zürich, 2005) 26.Google Scholar
225 Fassbender, B, ‘Sovereignty and Constitutionalism in International Law’ in Walker, Net al. (eds), Sovereignty in Transition (Hart, Oxford, 2003) 115–24.Google Scholar
226 Krasner, SD, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1999) 9 and 220.Google Scholar
227 Jennings, Sir R, ‘Sovereignty and International Law’; in Kreijen, Get al. (eds), State, Sovereignty, and International Governance (OUP, Oxford, 2002) 27, 31–2.Google Scholar
228 Jackson, RH, Quasi-States, Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World (CUP, Cambridge, 1993) 27.Google Scholar
229 Ibid 29.
230 International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, The Responsibility to Protect: Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, December 2001) para 1.34.
231 E.g., Snyder, J, From Voting to Violence: Democratization and Nationalist Conflict (WW Norton & Co, New York, 2000).Google Scholar
232 Barkin, JS, ‘The Evolution of the Constitution of Sovereignty and the Emergence of Human Rights Norms’ (1998) 27(2) Millennium 229, 246.Google Scholar
233 Zaum (n 118) 227–8.
234 UN Charter (n 205) art 1(2) and (3).
235 Vienna Declaration and Program of Action, pmbl paras 1(I), 3, 8, UN Doc A/CONF.157/23 (12 July 1993).
236 Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company Limited (Belgium v Spain), Second Phase, 1970 ICJ 3, 47 (February 5); Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (Southwest Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, 1971 ICJ 16, 46 (June 21); United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States of America v Iran), Merits, 1980 ICJ 3, 42 (May 24).
237 UN Charter (n 205) art 2(7).
238 VCLT (n 178) arts 53 and 64.
239 van Staden and Vollaard (n 172) 171–2.
240 Bryde, Cf BO, ‘International Democratic Constitutionalism’ in Macdonald, RStJ and Johnston, DM (eds), Towards World Constitutionalism: Issues in the Legal Ordering of the World Community (Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, 2005) 104.Google Scholar
241 Li, JZ and Guo, S, ‘China’ in Shelton, D (ed), International Law and Domestic Legal Systems: Incorporation, Transformation, and Persuasion (OUP, Oxford, 2011) 158, 172–4.Google Scholar
242 Ibid 182–6.
243 Harrison, J, The Human Rights Impact of the World Trade Organization (Hart, Oxford, 2007) 54–6.Google Scholar
244 Ibid 61–4.
245 HH Koh, ‘Why Do Nations Obey International Law?’ (1997) 106 Yale Law Journal 2599.
246 Ratner, S and Abrams, J, Accountability for Human Rights Atrocities in International Law (OUP, Oxford, 2009) 16.Google Scholar
247 Kumm (n 202) 311–3.
248 Ibid 260.
249 Cottier and Khorana (n 99) 247–55.
250 Reus-Smit (n 216) 159–62.
251 Woods (n 219) 77.
252 Krisch, N, ‘Global Administrative Law and the Constitutional Ambition’ in Twilight of Constitutionalism (n 201) 245, 248–9.Google Scholar
253 Grimm, D, ‘The Achievement of Constitutionalism and its Prospects in a Changed World’ in Twilight of Constitutionalism (n 201) 3, 14.Google Scholar
254 Brewster, R, ‘Unpacking the State’s Reputation’ (2009) 50 Harvard International Law Journal 231.Google Scholar
255 Posner, EA and Yoo, JC, ‘International Law and the Rise of China’ (2006) 7 Chicago Journal of International Law 1, 7–15.Google Scholar
256 China–IPR (n 14) paras 7.72–82.
257 Ibid para 7.79.
258 Ibid paras 7.134 and 7.137.
259 Ibid para 7.86.
260 Resolution on HRC (n 122) para 9.
261 UPR China I (n 8) para 71.