Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Analysis on the Effect of China’s Overseas NGO Law under the Differences in Legal Thinking

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of The China Nonprofit Review

The Law on the Management of Overseas NGOs’ Activities in Mainland China has come into effect on January 1, 2017. Ever since its second draft was unveiled to the public and then the final draft was adopted, Chinese and international civil society organizations have expressed their concerns and criticisms, far beyond the expectation of the Chinese government that intends to regulate illegal activities and protect legitimate rights with this law. This paper argues that the unexpected responses are provoked not only by the political purpose behind the adoption of this law – to safeguard national security – but also by the different interpretations of the law due to the differences in legal thinking. Beginning with an analysis of the law’s text, this paper continues to look at the regulatory framework and what has provoked the unexpected responses from the public, examines the differences in legal thinking – an underlying issue in this regard, and proposes that to ensure the effective enforcement of the law efforts should be made in three aspects, i.e. making clarification, establishing standard procedures, and protecting rights, to settle the idea differences between the legislature and the overseas civil society.

Affiliations: 1: Tsinghua University xijinj@tsinghua.edu.cn

10.1163/18765149-12341321
/content/journals/10.1163/18765149-12341321
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/18765149-12341321
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. Belkin Ira, Cohen Jerome A."“Will China Close Its Doors?”" New York Times 2015 June 2
2. Editorial"“Undue burdens”" Nature 2015Vol 522 127 128
3. Gao Bingzhong"“Emergence of Social Groups and Their Legitimacy”" Social Sciences in China 2000Vol 2 104 108
4. Hsu Carolyn L., Teets Jessica C. "“Is China’s New Overseas NGO Management Law Sounding the Death Knell for Civil Society? Maybe Not”" The Asia-Pacific Journal 2016 February 16Vol Vol. 14 Issue 4 2016 No. 3
5. Rutzen Douglas"“Aid Barriers and the Rise of Philanthropic Protectionism”" International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law 2015Vol 17 5 44
6. Wong Gillian"“U.S. Business, Professional Groups Sign Letter Opposing Draft China ngo Law”" Wall Street Journal 2015 June 4
7. Zi Ming"“Seven questions about the second draft of the Overseas NGO Law”" Loongzone.com 2015 May 7
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/18765149-12341321
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/18765149-12341321
2017-06-20
2018-01-23

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    The China Nonprofit Review — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation