CPLR Webinar Series on Asian Perspectives on Human Rights – Defining and Defending the Rule of Law
The rule of law is a principle of governance, at the very minimum requiring that all institutions, entities and persons should be subject to and should comply with legal norms. ‘Thicker’ versions of the rule of law go further in incorporating human rights and democratic governance. Some observe that the rule of law is under increasing threat in certain Asian jurisdictions, following a recent authoritarian turn. On 14 March 2022, the Public Law and Human Rights Forum (CPLR) hosted the third webinar in the Asian Perspective of Human Rights Series to discuss the definition and protection of the rule of law in the Asian context, focusing specifically on the sub-regions of East and Southeast Asia.
top row - Dr. Daniel PASCOE, Ms. Cristina BONOAN, Prof. Jothie RAJAH;
bottom row - Dr. Kristina SIMION, Prof. GIAO Vu Cong, Prof. Raphael PANGALANGAN, Dr. Benjamin LAWRENCE
The webinar was moderated by Dr. Daniel PASCOE (Associate Professor, School of Law, City University of Hong Kong; CPLR Core Member). He welcomed all participants and introduced the six distinguished panellists: Prof. Jothie RAJAH (Research Professor, American Bar Foundation, Chicago), Prof. GIAO Vu Cong (Associate Professor, Department of Constitution and Administration, Vietnam National University, Hanoi), Prof. Raphael PANGALANGAN (Assistant Professor & Associate Dean, Jindal Global Law School), Ms. Cristina BONOAN (Lawyer; Senior Lecturer, College of Law, University of the Philippines), Dr. Kristina SIMION (Research Fellow, Swedish Institute of International Affairs’ Asia Programme) and Dr. Benjamin LAWRENCE (Post-Doctoral Fellow, School of Law, National University of Singapore).
Dr. Daniel PASCOE invited the panellists to discuss how lawyers, politicians and civil society in their jurisdictions define the rule of law and whether such definitions are different from those popular within academic scholarship. Prof. Jothie RAJAH stated that there are two sets of meanings among the population in Singapore. One is the orthodox Diceyan conception, whereas the other meaning puts more emphasis on safeguarding property rights and minimizing corruption within government. Nevertheless, the tightly controlled media environment hinders the general public from understanding and debating the rule of law. Dr. Kristina SIMION commented that few legal practitioners in Myanmar can explain the rule of law in a way that reflects universal principles, because Myanmar’s various military governments have twisted the concept’s meaning to promote law and order and to oppress the population. Ms. Cristina BONOAN indicated that the Philippines has slowly departed from the rule of law definition and framework outlined in the 1987 constitution. Prof. Raphael PANGALANGAN added that a distinction would need to be drawn between the normative understanding of justice and the governance approach that the country has taken. Dr. Benjamin LAWRENCE stated that, in Cambodia, there was a resurgence in rule of law and legal discourse in the post Civil War period. He also outlined the ways that Cambodia has used rule of law discourse to achieve stability. Prof. GIAO Vu Cong said in Vietnam, some think that there is no difference between rule of law and rule by law, while others shared similar views with the United Nations that all parties in the country must be accountable to laws. He noted that a similar understanding on the ‘socialist rule of law’ is present in both Vietnam and in China.
In considering the role universities in East and Southeast Asia can play in strengthening the rule of law, the panellists suggested that exchange programmes can allow more law students from these jurisdictions to observe how the concept operates in other countries. Advancing and protecting academic freedom is also important. Law-related educational and vocational programmes should be carefully designed to ensure future legal practitioners can develop the necessary skills and motivation to contribute to safeguarding the rule of law in the public, judicial and political spheres.
On behalf of CPLR, Dr. Daniel PASCOE thanked the panellists for their inspiring views and thanks the audience for their participation. The webinar proved a great success.
法治是一種治理原則，最基本的定義是要求所有人、機構和實體都需遵從法律，並對法律負責，較廣的定義亦會考慮到人權及民主方面的保障。有觀察指某些亞洲國家最近正向獨裁主義方向靠瓏，法治受到越來越大的威脅。 2022 年 3 月 14 日，公法與人權論壇 (CPLR) 舉辦第三個亞洲人權視野網絡研討會，討論亞洲，特別是東亞和東南亞的次區域，對法治的定義和保護 。
上行- Daniel PASCOE博士， Cristina BONOAN律師，Jothie RAJAH教授;
下行 - Kristina SIMION博士，GIAO Vu Cong教授 ， Raphael PANGALANGAN教授， Benjamin LAWRENCE博士
網絡研討會由 Daniel PASCOE 博士（香港城市大學法學院副教授；CPLR 核心成員）主持。他歡迎所有與會者並介紹了六位傑出的講者：Jothie RAJAH教授（芝加哥美國律師基金會研究教授）、GIAO Vu Cong 教授（越南國立大學憲法與行政學系副教授）、Raphael PANGALANGAN教授（金德爾全球法學院助理教授兼副院長）、Cristina BONOAN 律師（菲律賓大學法學院高級講師）、Kristina SIMION 博士（瑞典國際事務研究所亞洲項目研究員）和 Benjamin LAWRENCE 博士（新加坡國立大學法學院博士後）。
Daniel PASCOE 博士邀請講者們分享不同司法管轄區內的律師、政治家和民間機構如何定義法治，以及這些定義是否與學術界流行的定義不同。 Jothie RAJAH 教授說在新加坡，法治一詞普遍有兩種解釋。一種是正統的戴雪概念， 另一種解釋則著重維護產權及解決政府腐敗問題。儘管如此，新加坡的媒體傳播受政府監督控，公眾較少機會認識到這概念，他們亦缺乏能公開討論這詞彙的平臺。 Kristina SIMION 博士評論只有少部分緬甸法律從業者能以國際社會普遍對這概念理解去解釋法治，這是因為緬甸各個軍政府都扭曲了這一概念的真正含義以壓迫民眾來保障其管治效力。Cristina BONOAN 律師表示，菲律賓現行的制度已慢慢偏離了一九八七年憲法中所描述的法治定義和框架。 Raphael PANGALANGAN 教授認為社會大眾對法治的規範性理解與政府實際採取的治理方法需要明確區分開來。 Benjamin LAWRENCE 博士表示內戰後，柬埔寨法治漸漸復蘇，他概述了柬埔寨如何在法治討論中實現社會穩定。 GIAO Vu Cong 教授表示在越南有一種觀點認為法治與以法而治沒有區別，而另一種則與聯合國持類似觀點，即沒有人、機構和實體在法律之上。他指越南和中國都對“社會主義法治”有類似理解。
在討論東亞和東南亞的大學在加強法治保護方面可以如何發揮的作用時， 講者們建議制定交流計劃，讓更多來自這些司法管轄區的法科學生觀察法治這一概念在其他國家是如何運作的。當然，促進和保護學術自由也很重要。大學應仔細設計與法律相關的教育和職業課程，以確保未來的法律從業者能夠培養必要的技能和動力，為維護公共、司法和政治領域的法治做出貢獻。
Daniel PASCOE 博士代表 CPLR 對講者積極提出具啟發性的觀點和所有觀眾的參與表示感謝，網絡研討會圓滿結束。