Select Page

SYMPOSIUM: CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW IN CHINA

On July 24, 2001, the Supreme People’s Court of China (SPC or the Supreme Court) promulgated a new judicial interpretation. This interpretation, commonly referred to as the “Reply to Qi Yuling’s Case” took effect on August 13, 2001.  On December 18, 2008, however, the Supreme Court annulled twenty-seven judicial interpretations at once, including the Reply to Qi Yuling’s Case. The reason given for the annulment of the Reply was that it was “no longer applicable.”  From its birth to its demise, the Reply survived seven years, four months, and five days in China’s legal system.

Although it was never actually applied to a single case after Qi Yuling’s Case, there were disputes regarding the Reply in the Chinese legal circle, which attracted almost all of the foreign scholars studying Chinese law.  From the very beginning, I have been one of the major participants in this long-lasting discussion and the last resolution fully adopted my point of view.  For many years, I insisted that the Reply to Qi Yuling’s Case was unnecessary and suspiciously unconstitutional.

I will address the following questions, which I believe may be difficult for foreign scholars to understand, and which may even be misunderstood by many Chinese legal professionals. First, what is the Reply to Qi Yuling’s Case? Second, what is the problem in China’s legal practice revealed by the disputes around the Reply? And third, what does the Reply mean and what does its annulment indicate?