Preface

In the report of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC), the goal of “promot[ing] law-based governance of the country in an all-around way” and the idea that “the rule of law is the basic way for the governance of China” have been clearly put forward. In 2013, XI Jinping, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, emphasized in many occasions the importance of “upholding a holistic approach to strengthening the rule of law in the country, in its government, and in society.” The Decision on Some Major Issues Concerning Comprehensively Deepening the Reform, which was adopted at the 3rdPlenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee, has stated China's commitment to “build a rule of law China” and “promote the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity”. Furthermore, the 4th Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee adopted the Decision of the CPC Central Committee on Major Issues Concerning Comprehensively Advancing Rule of Law, which solemnly proclaims that the great “Chinese Dream” of the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and the great path of China's peaceful development have ushered in a new era of rule of law. Nowadays, in a world that countries become increasingly interdependent, and challenges of globalization become increasingly conspicuous, a country's stability and development are closely interwoven with the global peace and development, and the rule of law at the national level is inextricably connected and interacted with the rule of law at the international level. Those all indicate that “building a rule of law China” is an integral part of the international rule of law. Therefore, as a global economic and political power, while promoting lawbased governance of the country in an all-around way, China should make its due contributions to the strengthening of the international rule of law, so that China can show the world its good image as a responsible “rule of law nation”, or even a “rule of law power”.

At the end of 2013, Institute of International Law of Wuhan University (“the Institute”) adjusted the research subject selection to this end. Besides fully using its traditional advantages in academic research on theories and practice of international law, we decided to unite all colleagues of the Institute to attach our focus to the core and necessitous issues of the governance of China. Therefore, in this annual major project of the Institute approved by the Ministry of Education, we planned to write and publish the Report On China's Practice in Promoting the International Rule of Law (“the Report”). The Report of 2014 was written in Chinese in the first year, and from 2015, we will update it annually with new information and leading-edge findings, write it both in English and Chinese, and publish the latest edition at home and abroad in succession.

The Report aims at summarizing comprehensively the latest developments in the international rule of law, especially the new trends in the last two years, and focusing on the ideas that China advocates, the principles that China maintains and the actions that China takes in every specific area of it. The Report will systematically demonstrate significant contributions that China has made to promote the international rule of law, which will eloquently refute the groundless accusations against China's practice in this respect made by some western countries. It will show the international community with ample facts that China has all along not only adhered to the norms of international law in good faith, but also participated actively in international law-making processes, in establishment and operation of various international institutional mechanisms, as well as in other specific actions advancing the international rule of law.

The Report focuses on practice and is published as a pragmatic supplement to the White Paper titled “China's Efforts and Achievements in Promoting the Rule of Law” (“the White Paper”). Two White Papers have been published by the Information Office of the State Council in 2009 and 2011 respectively, based on joint studies organized by the China Law Society and carried out by relevant political science and law institutions. However, it is regretful that the two White Papers are limited to achievements in promoting the rule of law at the national level, without mentioning contributions China has made at the international level since the reform and opening-up over 30 years ago. In fact, the progress of the rule of law in China keeps pace with the whole progress of the reform and opening-up. While China's internal reform has always been in parallel with the improvement of the rule of law at the national level, the reform and openness of China are no doubt inextricably interlinked with its rule of law practice at the international level. Hence, an elaboration on the accomplishments and challenges in respect of the rule of law shall cover China's practice at both the national and international levels. This Report seems to be a good chance to fill in this gap.

The publication of the Report at home and abroad would increase the transparency of China's international rule of law practice. As a research of a folk think tank, it can provide comprehensive, systematic and latest information concerning the international rule of law to heads and officials of state authorities, and offer guidance for the governance of China. It will facilitate local governments and enterprises to carry out foreign trade, investment, finance cooperations and other forms of civil and commercial exchanges and cooperations. At the same time, the facts contained in the Report will urge other countries, international institutions, non-governmental organizations, international associations, civil societies and transnational corporations to make an objective assessment of China's contributions in promoting the international rule of law.

The practice referred in the Report is of Chinese characteristics. To some extent, it fills in the gap between theory and practice which has baffled international law scholars in China for a long time. It not only provides systematic information in relation to the practice of our nation and government, but also develops a new path for studying and teaching international law. It is beneficial for the development of China's international law studies in Chinese manner around the world, by which will boost China's influence and give China a bigger say in the progress of advancing the international rule of law.

The Report discusses almost every issue on the rule of law connected with global governance from China's perspective. It consists of four parts. The first part describes the practice of China in respect of the rule of law and relations among states in chapters on China and the Fundamental Principles of International Law, Rule of Law in the Maintenance of International Peace and Security, China and International Rule of Law in Development, China and International Rule of Law in Environmental Protection, China and a New International Energy Order, China's Sea and Border and the Rule of Law in Polar Regions, China and International Law of the Sea, China and Rule of Law in Aviation and Outer Space, China and Rule of Law in Cyberspace, China and International Human Rights Law, China and International Humanitarian Law, China and International Criminal Law, and China and International Rule of Law in Other Fields. Part two focuses on the practice of China in respect of the rule of law and international economic relations and includes chapters on China and International Trade Law, China and International Investment Law, China and Rule of Law in International Finance, Development of International Taxation Law in China, China and International Maritime Law, China and International Law on Intellectual Property, and China and Regional Trade Agreements. The third part mainly explores China's engagement in the rule of law in international civil and commercial affairs, with chapters on China and Law of Application of Law; China's Participation in the International Unification of Private International Law; China, Foreign-Related Civil Procedure and International Legal Assistance in Civil and Commercial Matters; Developments of International Commercial Arbitration in China; China and International Law on Cultural Heritage Protection, Consumer Protection and Food Security. The final part systematically introduces the history and status quo of teaching and dissemination of international law in China, in particular the rapid development of cultivation of talents and public dissemination of international law over the 30 years since the economic reform and opening-up.

The Institute was established in 1980 and was one of the earliest research institutions of international law in China. In 1987, the institute was identified as the key research institute by the former State Board of Education. In September 2000, the Institute was authorized by the Ministry of Education as the key research base of humanities and social sciences among China's colleges and universities. In 2014, the Chinese Institute of Territory and Maritime Rights of Wuhan University supported by the Institute was set up and listed into “the 2011 Projects”. In 2015, the Institute was selected by the Propaganda Department of the CPC Central Committee as one of the first pilot units of the national top think-tanks. Over 30 years, the Institute has always put emphasis on the interdisciplinary and comprehensive studies of public international law, private international law and international economic law, and has developed distinctive characteristics and advantages on discipline development, talent training, scientific research, information and public service.

The 2015 Report is the continuation of the 2014 edition, and is collectively written by researchers of the Institute. Professor QIN Tianbao, the director of the Wuhan University Research Institute of Environmental Law, has also contributed a chapter. Compiling this report is a new attempt without any prior experience, so unavoidable omissions and deficiencies still exist in both structure and content. We welcome comments from academic peers, which will help us to make further improvements in next edition. Finally, we gratefully acknowledge the Social Sciences Academy Press (China) for publishing the Report both in English and Chinese.

Zeng Lingliang

Feng Jiehan

January 2016