Administrative Justice in Authoritarian States

Author(s):  
Eric C. Ip

This chapter studies the institutions of administrative justice—administrative procedure, judicial review of administrative action, and administrative redress—in contemporary non-liberal democracies. It reviews the theoretical literature pertaining to administrative justice, with special emphasis on the principal-agent model. It examines two case studies of administrative justice, one national and one local, both from the People’s Republic of China, the world’s most populous authoritarian state: Mainland China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. It reveals that authoritarian administrative justice is, at the end of the day, deeply paradoxical. Autonomous bureaucratic oversight mechanisms empower autocratic rulers to resolve agency problems through discovering information of maladministration, but remain permanently under the temptation to compromise the autonomy of administrative justice, so that the latter would never evolve into a threat to regime security.

Author(s):  
Nicholas J. Monaco

Taiwan is a country with a rich history and cultural ties to mainland China. Though there has been much research and effort dedicated to propaganda and censorship in the People’s Republic of China over the years, less attention has been paid to the digital propaganda sphere in Taiwan. This report explores computational propaganda in Taiwan and finds that digital propaganda in Taiwan can be divided into two types: (1) internal propaganda on domestic political issues and campaigns, and (2) cross-Strait propaganda—emanating from the mainland and promoting reunification of the two countries. Furthermore, recent computational and social research points to manual propaganda being the main method used in campaigns in both countries. The use of two political bots in Taiwan, an anti-fake news bot and an intelligence-gathering crawler bot used in a 2014 electoral campaign, is explored in detail.


1993 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Biddulph

This article illustrates the ways in which the legislative regimes for the imposition of sanctions of administrative detention give broad and vaguely defined powers to the police in the People's Republic of China. The research found that most legislation gave police wide discretion to exercise their powers and, in particular, to determine whether certain conduct merited the detention of the person. While processes to review such police actions have been legally established, they tend to be limited in scope. For the most part, the person aggrieved by the administrative action has limited capacity to require the review body to investigate or act upon their complaint.


1990 ◽  
Vol 100 (403) ◽  
pp. 1109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Suk-Young Chwe

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document