More Discretion, Less Law: Exploring the Dilemmas in the Recent Anticorruption Reform in China

In 2018, the promulgation of the Supervision Law in China professed the central government’s determination to combat ‘corruption’ at a new level. By putting ‘all public officials exerting public powers’ under supervision, these newly-established supervisory commissions have unified the dual-track and dual-leadership supervision system that came into force since 1954. In this respect, some have argued that the supervision reform is a step forward toward promoting the Rule of Law in China. However, this paper argues that there are some key ambiguities to be clarified in this law, especially with regard to non-typical corruptions - the vaguely-defined supervised object of ‘duty-related violations’. By comparing this notion with similar concepts in other countries, particularly the ‘maladministration’ under the jurisdiction of an ombudsman, this paper suggests that the supervisory power for anticorruption needs to be checked by other state powers so as not to degenerate into a new discretionary power.

Pandemic and PILs: A Study on the Approach of the High Courts in India

Studies in Public interest Litigation (PIL) in India are predominantly about the Supreme Court's approach in meeting the ends of justice through indigenously evolved jurisdiction. The High Courts as important constitutional bodies are more often than not remain out of detailed discussion. As the High Courts enjoy concurrent jurisdiction with the Supreme Court with regard to PILs, this paper aims to study the pattern of invocation of the jurisdiction at the regional level. It surveys the variety of pleas and consequent action under PIL jurisdiction (or inaction, as the case may be) of different High Courts in India relating to covid crisis and consequential matters. To that end, it undertakes a survey of High Court orders or judgments from April to July, 2020. It seeks to lay bare the extent of demands that are made before the Courts through PIL. What kinds of action were expected from the High Courts during the pandemic? How did different Courts respond to such pleas? Were the directions and level of response homogenous or varied? The paper pursues these questions, and describes the pandemic though the lens of PIL in Indian High Courts. It goes on to argue that the High Courts in India need to take greater cognizance of their orders inter-se especially in PIL matters, as human rights protection through PIL cannot have contradictory voices.