Scholars have welcomed the Communist Party of China’s (CPC) latest moves to advance rule of law in an all-round manner that upholds socialism with Chinese characteristics, challenging the global dominance of the Western, capitalist model of “rule of law” by highlighting its flaws.

“Only when we raise the socialist rule of law with Chinese characteristics to a global level can we recognize its meaning and influence,” said Su Changhe, a professor at the School of International Relations and Public Affairs at Fudan University. Su noted excessive Westernization in domestic academic circles had led a handful of scholars to try and make the Chinese political legal system emulate the Western model of “rule of law” and “democracy.”

“The comprehensive promotion of law-based governance allows no hype and rejects rampant thoughts of ‘Western democracy,’” said Liu Shulin, a professor at the School of Marxism at Tsinghua University, adding that these thoughts are “discourse traps” Western society sets to promote its “universal values” and mode of political institution.

Just as there will never be absolute and abstract freedom in the world, scholars claim there is no absolute and abstract rule of law in the world.

Studies of the rule of law cannot be divorced from specific social and historical contexts. The capitalist “rule-of-law” model reflects how bourgeois legal ideologists historically considered the capitalist economy and regional issues, scholars said. These beliefs are typical of the capitalist class and bear obvious signs of times and regions, they added.

According to He Qinhua, president of East China University of Political Science and Law, in the 17th and 18th centuries, the bourgeoisie created the capitalist society for the sake of their own interests.

On one hand, they rampantly exploited laborers, sparing no efforts for scientific innovation, industrial revolutions and resorting to force to seize state power; on the other hand, they preached the dominant world outlook about capitalist “rule of law” and “constitutionalism” in the establishment of the capitalist legal institution and system.

Many problems emerged over time in the developmental courses of the capitalist “rule-of-law” model, He said.

Firstly, it fails to resolve the contradiction between formal and substantive rule of law. He claimed it even sticks to the tradition of “formal rule of law” at the cost of “substantive rule of law,” as exemplified by the OJ Simpson murder trial (1995) in the U.S.

Secondly, its theory isn’t always reflected by its actions. For instance, the U.S. uses arms across the world regardless of legal provisions and procedures prescribed by the United Nations.

Thirdly, the core issue, namely safeguarding the principal status and equal rights of citizens, is not well addressed. Racial discrimination, for example, is deeply rooted in many Western countries.

Wang Yiwei, a professor at the School of International Studies at Renmin University of China, added that the “tripartite” political system central to capitalist “rule of law” is seriously flawed, so non-Western countries should adopt a rule-of-law model based on their own history and unique conditions rather than blindly adopting the Western, capitalist model.

Su said the socialist democratic political system with Chinese characteristics empowers people and upholds effectiveness of the rule of law.

In a broad sense, CPC disciplines and state laws constitute a socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics, added Su, who claimed Party disciplines are stricter than state laws.
“This is the essence of the socialist, democratic and rule-of-law systems, differentiating the socialist rule of law from the so-called capitalist version,” said Su.
Su held that the shaping of the socialist legal system and rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics has two meanings to human political civilization.

Firstly, the vast legal system featuring sound national and social order maintained by China’s population of nearly 1.4 billion represents a major global legal system in itself.

Secondly, it bears international political significance. It is necessary for China’s peaceful development to provide legal and rule-of-law approaches for solving world problems.

The second meaning will be more prominent as China is involved in world affairs on a massive scale and will back up new-type international relations in the dimensions of law and rule of law, Su noted.