Skip to main content Accessibility help

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.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 5 - Expansions in Competitive Promotion and the Implications for Judicial Autonomy

  • Jonathan J. Kinkel, Arizona State University
  • Book:
    Growth and Survival
    Published online:
    26 May 2022
    Print publication:
    09 June 2022, pp 93-126

  • Summary

    Changes to the legal profession in the post-Mao years led to significant changes regarding courts and judicial autonomy that have been deeply intertwined with the stratification of living standards, dramatic growth of the Chinese legal profession, and emergence of significant income differentials for lawyers across urban localities, especially after 1992. This details these dynamics, which are consistent with this book’s ecological explanation of court reform, which posits that the structure and process of socio-legal forms have an interactive relationship; I also provide evidence in the second part of this chapter suggesting that these dynamics in the social forms of law influence the substance of law, for example, the decisions of court leaders in urban China to increase transparency of their courts and enhance the statutory basis of their judicial decisions. These developments also indicate expansions in judges’ overall decisional autonomy, as discussed in Chapter 1.