Rule by law versus rule of law: A multimodal analysis of persuasion and legal ideologies in anti-corruption discourse in China

The authors conduct a multimodal analysis of the anti-corruption discourse in China by employing the SFL genre theory and the SF-MDA approach. Anti-corruption discourse that popularizes the anti-corruption mechanism and educates the officials constitutes an important part of China’s anti-corruption campaign. This paper first presents a genre analysis of a corpus of 51 anti-corruption videos on the official public legal education website to examine how these videos are designed in their overall organization to achieve the persuasion purpose—alert officials to stay away from corruption. It is found that most anti-corruption videos are expositions that are embedded with different story genres and emphasize the negative consequence of corruption on one’s family. Using Multimodal Analysis Video software, the authors then analyze the different reader stances enacted through a range of multimodal resources in three representative anti-corruption videos. Based on the detailed multimodal analysis, the authors finally explain how the use of linguistic and visual resources in the videos realizes the underlying ideologies of rule by law and rule of law and future implications of this study.

Disagreement, Unilateral Judgment, and Kant’s Argument for Rule by Law

Kant argues that it is only as citizens of a properly constituted state that persons are able to respect one another’s innate right to freedom, for joint subjection to the authority of a state enables them to avoid what Kantians call “the problem of unilateralism”: when I interact with you in a state of nature according to my judgment of right in circumstances of disagreement between us, I implicitly claim that my judgment, and not yours, has authority over us simply because it is mine. But this argument seems vulnerable to a powerful objection: my reason for acting on my judgment of right is not that it is mine but rather that it is, as I believe, correct, and so there is no sense in which I am claiming special authority for that judgment. This paper defends the Kantian problem of unilateralism against this objection and, in so doing, illuminates the feature of the Kantian conception of right that accounts for why, no matter how good and right-loving they might be, persons in a state of nature about right are unable coherently to pursue the aim of acting rightly.

On Tyranny and the Global Legal Order

Since classical antiquity debates about tyranny, tyrannicide and preventing tyranny's re-emergence have permeated governance discourse. Yet within the literature on the global legal order, tyranny is missing. This book creates a taxonomy of tyranny and poses the question: could the global legal order be tyrannical? This taxonomy examines the benefits attached to tyrannical governance for the tyrant, considers how illegitimacy and fear establish tyranny, asks how rule by law, silence and beneficence aid in governing a tyranny. It outlines the modalities of tyranny: scale, imperialism, gender, and bureaucracy. Where it is determined that a tyranny exists, the book examines the extent of the right and duty to effect tyrannicide. As the global legal order gathers ever more power to itself, it becomes imperative to ask whether tyranny lurks at the global scale.

“Rule of law” with Chinese characteristics: Evolution and manipulation

Government under law or law under government? Rule of law or rule by law? That was the hotly debated constitutional law topic in China during the last two decades of the twentieth century. In her article, “Shifting Meanings of Fazhi and China’s Journey toward Socialist Rule of Law”, Professor Ye gives us a careful and thoughtful analysis of relevant developments that includes the decisive outcome reinforced by current Communist Party chief Xi Jinping. Drawing upon China’s imperial traditions and dictatorial Legalist philosophy, Xi wields law as an instrument of comprehensive official power, although in practice his repression strays into Communist lawlessness.

The post-2010 ‘Democratic Rule of Law’ practice of the Hungarian Constitutional Court under a rule by law governance

The paper focuses on the democratic rule of law principle as it appeared in the practice of the Hungarian Constitutional Court under the 1989 Constitution and the 2012 Fundamental Law. The rule of law doctrine had a paramount role in the argumentation of the Court in the 1990s as a normative fact and a programme of the Hungarian state. Under the Fundamental Law introduced in 2012, however, it has been somewhat relegated to the background in case law. The study first recalls the main achievements and characteristics of the democratic rule of law state interpretations of the Constitutional Court and then focuses on developments since the introduction of the Fundamental Law. On the one hand, it outlines the constitutional and institutional capacity of the court regarding the protection of the rule of law principle. On the other hand, it reveals the characteristics of the post-FL interpretation through case studies in the field of legal certainty and judicial independence, both of which were representative elements of the pre-2010 constitutional practice from the point of view of the democratic rule of law state doctrine.

Indigenous patrimonialization as an operation of the liberal state

Indigenous conservation through patrimonialization is the product of political and legal decisions made by a non-indigenous agent: the liberal state, using the law to retain a form of bios. We propose that patrimonialization is the device by which liberal states have processed and integrated indigenous claims into a form of bios ultimately designed to safeguard state legal structures. We argue that, to uphold the rule of law in contexts of struggle and resistance that challenge the very understanding of the law, states respond by wielding the law in the form of the rule by law, that is, pushing the law to the limit to give normative content to the criteria by which the state conducts its affairs, without straying from the individual rights framework. We hold that the rule by law is an operation that defines the patrimonialization of indigenous peoples. It increases their visibility while imposing limits on political action to keep them from becoming sui juris subjects capable of breaching the distinction between zoe and bios. In this article, we try to understand the political–ideological intent of these decisions, the intentions beyond the letter of the law of patrimonialized peoples.

Social justice — the basis of public accord in modern society (Part 2)

Since the beginning of socio-economic transformations (1991), the state system has changed, but the concept of the essence of social justice established over the years of socialism has been preserved. This circumstance is crucial for mutual understanding and consent in our society. All subsequent events up to voting on the constitutional amendments (2020), convincingly testify in favor of the statement made. These amendments are a specific invention that opens up the possibility for the government to relieve constantly increasing tension for some time. The fact is that since the departure of tsarism from the historical scene (based on the divine origin of its power), the Constitution represents the country as a state ruled rule by law and in fact performs the function of a social contract. Therefore, according to the established tradition, a change of power always entails constitutional transformations. At the same time, everyone understands that there is a gap between the well-written constitutional norms and the reality of life in the country, which allows the government to rule at their own discretion. At the same time, the possibilities for maneuvering are far from unlimited. Both the constitutional amendments and the actions of the authorities during the period of self-isolation show a reverse movement towards socialist distributional relations. This is an inevitable payment for the use of market mechanisms in society, for which, even many years after the start of reforms, distribution relations serve as the main criterion for social justice. By initiating such amendments, the government show their concern and desire at least to look like wishing to restore social justice, and with it to increase trust, harmony, and cohesion in the society.