Affiliation:
1. School of Government and Institute of Public Governance Peking University Beijing China
2. Faculty of Law The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong China
Abstract
AbstractAlthough judicial empowerment has become increasingly common worldwide, the expansion of judicial powers in authoritarian countries faces persistent obstacles, such as institutional dependence, lack of political clout, and the repression of civil society. Through empirically examining three cases of environmental legal entrepreneurship under China's new public interest litigation (PIL) system, this study aims to reevaluate the patterns and limits of judicial expansion under authoritarianism. It finds that Chinese judges, prosecutors, and NGOs have been able to leverage the PIL system and their respective institutional advantages to substantially expand judicial oversight on eco‐environmental protection. However, the state has established boundaries for such legal entrepreneurship in terms of subject matter, institutional autonomy, and geographic reach, effectively confining them within political spheres considered unthreatening to the regime. Such quarantined judicial expansion shields relevant actors from authoritarian governments' tendency to suppress legal mobilization and thus may be a more viable form of judicial expansion in nondemocratic settings.
Funder
National Office for Philosophy and Social Sciences
Subject
Law,Sociology and Political Science
Reference74 articles.
1. Judicialization in authoritarian regimes: The expansion of powers of the Chinese Supreme People’s Court
2. Laying down the Law: Medvedev Vows War on Russia's “Legal Nihilism.”;Barber Lionel;Financial Times,2008
3. Friends of the Court: The Republican Alliance and Selective Activism of the Constitutional Court of Turkey
4. Between Starvation and Globalization: Realizing the Right to Food in India;Birchfield Lauren;Michigan Journal of International Law,2010
5. PUCLv.Union of India
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献