Book review of Daniel F. Vukovich's After Autonomy: A Post-Mortem for Hong Kong’s first Handover, 1997-2019 by Simon Young

"After Autonomy: A Post-Mortem for Hong Kong’s first Handover, 1997-2019 by Daniel F. Vukovich. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan, 2022. XIV, 175pp. US$109.99 (Paperback). ISBN: 9789811949852"
Simon Young
The China Review, Vol. 24, no. 3 (August 2024), 305 – 308
Published in August 2024

Book Review:  Hong Kong is dead, long live Hong Kong. That is one way of capturing the thesis of Daniel Vukovich’s new book, After Autonomy: A Post-Mortem for Hong Kong’s first Handover. For there must be a death to hold a post-mortem and life after autonomy. The autonomy he refers to is that of Hong Kong from Mainland China, as entrenched by the Basic Law. What comes next, he hopes, is the integration of Hong Kong and Mainland China in an egalitarian manner that is attentive to the needs of people on both sides of the border.

    Vukovich has written an important book about Hong Kong, at a critical time. It is recommended reading for all those who care about Hong Kong’s future. More than a commentary on the 2019 protests and unrest, the book reflects on the significance of 2019 along the historical trajectory of Hong Kong’s progress and evolution. Conscious of being labelled as belonging to either the “yellow” or “blue” camps – the superficial and divisive labels used in public discourse after the 2014 Occupy Central protests – Vukovich takes neither side. Instead, he writes a “green book” (p. 6), a mélange of yellow and blue...Please contact Prof. Young for a full copy of the review.

Weilin Xiao on Expansion and Restriction: Divergent Paths Towards Modernizing Family Laws in Japan and China, 1868–1930 (The American Journal of Comparative Law)

"Expansion and Restriction: Divergent Paths Towards Modernizing Family Laws in Japan and China, 1868–1930"
Weilin Xiao
The American Journal of Comparative Law
Published online: August 2024

Abstract: Before their encounters with Western powers in the nineteenth century, Chinese and Japanese societies were deeply embedded in traditional family systems that formed the backbone of their social structures. However, with the onset of legal modernization, these nations adopted nearly diametrically opposed strategies for reforming their customary family laws. Primarily, Japanese legal reformers under the Meiji regime bolstered the family’s authority and emphasized its political role. In stark contrast, the Chinese legal reformers during the late Qing and Republican periods curtailed family authority and diminished its significance. While the modernization of family laws in Japan and China has been the subject of scholarly research respectively, the differences between the two countries and the reasons behind their distinct approaches have not been adequately explored. This Article seeks to fill this gap.

Through a comparative analysis of the legislative histories of both countries, this Article argues that their divergent paths stemmed from differences in the historical functions of family systems and the modern political contexts encountered by legal reformers during the period of legal modernization. In Japan, the family system was historically politically connected with the state, and the Meiji regime solidified its control over this system through modern codification efforts. Consequently, Meiji political elites saw the integration of the populace into the new absolutist imperial regime as advantageous, leveraging the political loyalty of families to achieve this. In contrast, the Chinese family system had become politically disconnected from the state by the late imperial era. In the aftermath of the Republican Revolution, the Guomindang regime navigated a landscape of rival political forces that significantly challenged its authority. Political elites aimed to dismantle customary family laws to weaken the traditional family system, which they viewed as a threat to governmental centralization and societal unity. They also sought to project a modern, liberal image to garner wider political support.

Ziying LIANG awarded the HKU Foundation First Year Excellent PhD Award 2023/24 (Interview with Ziying LIANG)

Congratulations to Ms Ziying LIANG for being awarded the HKU Foundation First Year Excellent PhD Award 2023/24. The Award gives due recognition to PhD students who have excellent performance during the probationary period.

Ziying is a PhD candidate in the Faculty of Law. Her research interests are in procedure law and public interest litigation and her doctoral research currently focuses on the public interest litigation against wildlife crimes in Mainland China.

Prior to her doctoral research at the University of Hong Kong (HKU), she obtained her Bachelor of Laws (LLB) degree from South China Normal University (SCNU, 2013-17). Afterwards, she obtained a MPhil degree in Procedure Law from the Graduate School of China University of Political Science and Law (CUPL, 2017-20) and graduated as an Outstanding Graduate Student from the School of Criminal Justice. 

During her PhD studies at HKU, Ziying also works as a research assistant at the Faculty of Law, assisting in editing books and participating in research projects of the Faculty. She is a student fellow of the Centre for Interdisciplinary Legal Studies at HKU. Ziying has published articles on public interest litigation in both English and Chinese Journals and delivered speeches at relevant conferences in Asia. Her articles have received several awards for their contributions. Additionally, she has been appointed as one of the student representatives of the RPg students of the Faculty of Law for the academic year of 2023-25.

1. ​What is the topic of your study?

I started my doctoral career with research and exploration of public interest litigation in China, which was also the topic of my MPhil thesis. At present, my research interests lie in the areas of public interest litigation and criminal litigation, with a particular focus on public interest litigation against wildlife crimes.

2. What have been your main achievements?

This summer, I am honoured to have been selected as a recipient of the HKU Foundation First Year Excellent PhD Award 2023/24. I think two achievements during my probation period greatly helped me to achieve this honour. Firstly, my research interest drove me to participate in the paper call for the Symposium on Strictly Preventing and Controlling Environmental Risks and Safeguarding National Ecological Security in Accordance with the Law, which was the Annual Conference of the China Ecological Civilization Research and Promotion Association and the Ad Hoc Committee on Multiple Settlement Mechanisms for Environmental Disputes of the Chinese Society of Environmental and Resources Law in 2022. Among the 123 submitted articles, my conference article ‘An Empirical Study on Wild Animal Conservation under the Threshold of the Criminal Incidental Civil Public Interest Litigation in the PRC – Based on 496 Judgments’, was selected as the second-prize winner (the first of seven second-prize articles) following expert review. Secondly, during my probationary period, I submitted an article to the Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy, an internationally renowned peer-reviewed journal of high standing, and was successful in having it published in 2023.

                              

In addition, my new article ‘Restorative Compensation Mechanism for Criminal Incidental Civil Public Interest Litigation Relating to Marine Ecology in the Greater Bay Area of Mainland China – A Sample of First-instance Judgements on Marine Ecological Offences’ (the first of nine third-prize articles), has been successfully awarded the Third Prize of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area Legal Forum (GBA Legal Forum 2024). I am honoured and delighted to be invited to participate in this forum on behalf of the third-prize winners. This article has been presented in the conference proceedings on 30 August 2024, and will be published in the Chinese peer-reviewed journal – Nomocracy Forum (a Chinese academic journal indexed by the Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index (CSSCI)) in April 2025.

3. How do you feel about receiving this award?

I would like to convey my sincere gratitude to the University of Hong Kong Foundation for recognising my excellent academic performance during the probationary period. I have to say that pursuing a doctoral career is undoubtedly a challenging mission, and it does require great determination and perseverance. I would like to extend my heartfelt appreciation to my supervisor, Professor Amanda Whitfort, for her continuous support and warm encouragement throughout my journey of self-surpassing. Additionally, I wish to express my thanks to my co-supervisor, Professor Richard Cullen, who contributed many insightful ideas to our discussions, as well as Professor Simon Young, who generously provided me with advice and encouragement in my academic life. I am also profoundly grateful to my family and close friends for their companionship and understanding along the path I have chosen. I always believe that the pursuit of continuous self-surpassing is a lifelong journey that enriches our lives in countless ways. Failure is not fatal; rather, it is the courage to persist that truly matters. I wish all those who have chosen doctoral studies the happiness and success that belong to them in their journey.

Peter Chau on The Comparative Account of Tort Reparation (Ratio Juris)

"The Comparative Account of Tort Reparation"
Peter Chau
Ratio Juris
Published online: August 2024

Abstract: How can tort reparation be justified? Stephen Perry's comparative account relies on two ideas: (1) the loss arising from an injurious event should be distributed between the injurer and the victim rather than be borne by society at large; and (2) the distribution of loss between the injurer and the victim depends on a comparison of their “relative degree of fault.” Many believe that a strength of the comparative account lies in its ability to explain apportionment in contributory negligence cases. I argue, to the contrary, that such cases pose a serious difficulty for the account.

New Issue of Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law (Volume 25, Issue 2, August 2024)

ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE LAW

Editor-in-Chief: Simon NM Young

Publisher: Brill, Leiden

2024, Volume 25, Issue 2

Table of Contents

Revisiting State Sovereignty Interpretation in Managing Rohingya Refugee Arrivals Amid the covid-19 Pandemic in Indonesia

Author:  Natalia Yeti Puspita

Pages: 127–152

Online Publication Date: 16 Aug 2024

The Constitutional Right to Compensation for Violation of Fundamental Rights: An Analysis of Recent Developments in India

Author: Aman Kumar Sharma and Saroj Bohra

Pages: 153–172

Online Publication Date: 16 Aug 2024

Protection of Factually Innocent as a New Narrative to Abolish the Death Penalty in Malaysia

Author: Mohd Munzil Muhamad, Wong Hua Siong, and Baraneetharan Kishur Kumar

Pages: 173–190

Online Publication Date: 16 Aug 2024

Remoulding Coroner’s Inquests in Hong Kong through the Right to Life

Author: Trevor T. W. Wan

Pages: 191–214

Online Publication Date: 16 Aug 2024

Valeria Vázquez Guevara Awarded the Chancellor's Prize 2024 (Humanities, Creative Arts and Social Sciences)

Congratulations to Valeria Vázquez Guevara, whose PhD Thesis “Truth Commissions: The Authority of International Law and the State after Conflict” was awarded the Chancellor's Prize 2024 by The University of Melbourne. The thesis was supervised by Professor Sundhya Pahuja and Professor Shaun McVeigh. The thesis forms the basis of Valeria's forthcoming monograph, Truth Commissions and International Law: Jurisdiction, Representation, Authority (under contract, Cambridge University Press).

     Background on the prize: The Chancellor's Prize for Excellence in the PhD Thesis is awarded by the University of Melbourne each year to up to six nominees. A seventh award may be made to an Indigenous candidate. The awards recognize the quality of the research theses including international reach, impact or potential impact of the topic, publications or other research outputs. Please click here for more details regarding the prize.

HKU Law Welcomes Prof. Trevor Wan

Welcome to Prof. Trevor Wan, who joins the Faculty of Law as an Assistant Professor.

Trevor T. W. Wan is an Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law, The University of Hong Kong (HKU), where he serves as Deputy Director of the Bachelor of Social Sciences (Government and Laws) and Bachelor of Laws dual degree programme.

His research harnesses interdisciplinary approaches drawn mainly from political science, among other fields, to study comparative constitutional and administrative law, coronial law and forensic jurisprudence. His work has appeared, or is forthcoming, in leading peer-reviewed periodicals including the International Journal of Constitutional Law, Public Law, German Law Journal, Judicial Review, Asian Journal of Comparative Law, Statute Law Review, and Journal of Criminal Law.

Born and raised in Hong Kong, Trevor holds an LL.M. from Harvard Law School where he was the Hong Kong Jockey Club Fellow, and an LL.B. and a B.Soc.Sc. in Government and Laws from HKU, both with First Class Honours. He is a member of the International Society of Public Law and the British Institute of International and Comparative Law. He currently serves as an Associate Editor of the Hong Kong Law Journal, the flagship faculty journal of HKU Law.

Trevor's Research areas include:

• Comparative Constitutional Law
• Comparative Administrative Law
• Coronial Law

Craig Purshouse et al on Liability For Rugby Related Neuro-Degenerative Disease: A Question of Tort (JPIL)

"Liability For Rugby Related Neuro-Degenerative Disease: A Question of Tort"
Emma Cave, Craig Purshouse, and Joe Purshouse
The Journal of Personal Injury Law, 2, pp. 93-112
Published online: May 2024

Abstract: This article examines the potential liability of rugby governing bodies in negligence for their alleged past failures to protect players from known risks associated with the neurodegenerative consequences of rugby-related traumatic brain injury. Not only is there a strong public interest in the claims given the impact it could have on the game, but the claims raise novel issues in tort law and legal medicine. We consider the action in negligence in light of recent developments such as scientific advances in relation to both causes and diagnoses of neurodegenerative disease, criticism of the industry from independent committees, and increased readiness of the courts to hold sporting bodies to account. The article sets out the barriers a claimant would face and the doctrinal advances that would be required to overcome them. While other writers have been sceptical of the chances of claimant success, the argument put forward in this article is that barriers to a claim are not insurmountable, provided the claim is carefully articulated taking account of both doctrine and the developing evidence base.

New book by Cora Chan: Deference in Human Rights Adjudication (Oxford University Press)

Deference in Human Rights Adjudication
Cora Chan
Oxford University Press
Published in June 2024
224 pp.

Abstract: In human rights adjudication, courts sometimes face issues that they lack the expertise or constitutional legitimacy to resolve. One way of dealing with such issues is to ‘defer’, or accord a margin of appreciation, to the judgments of public authorities. Although there is a rich literature on the subject of deference, two important questions remain unresolved: what devices courts should use to exercise deference, and how deference can be made more workable for judges and predictable for litigants. This book offers the first comprehensive analysis of these questions. It introduces six devices for deference (namely, the burden of proof, standard of proof, standard of review, giving of weight, choice of interpretation, and choice of remedy), analyses how courts should choose amongst them, and proposes techniques for rendering deference practicable. The book’s arguments will enable human rights adjudication to be more principled and more in line with the rule of law and separation of powers. The book has two distinctive features. First, it engages with the jurisprudence of six common law jurisdictions that apply a structured proportionality test in rights adjudication, namely, Canada, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Second, the book offers guidelines for judges who wish to apply its theoretical arguments. Combining theory with practice in a broad range of jurisdictions, the book will be an important reference for researchers and students of constitutional theory, comparative constitutional law, and human rights law around the world. It will also assist practitioners, judges, and policymakers who have to grapple with issues of deference in adjudication.

HKU Law Welcomes Prof. Julian Nowag

Welcome to Prof. Julian Nowag, who joins the Faculty of Law as an Associate Professor.

Julian is an Associate Professor at HKU and Lund University, Sweden, specializing in competition law. He is a leading scholar in sustainability and is currently working on the intersection between AI and competition. His recent work with Thomas K Cheng on  Algorithmic Predation and Exclusion won a Concurrence Award in 2023. Julian is also an Associate at the Oxford Centre for Competition Law and Policy and serves as a managing editor of The Journal for Antitrust Enforcement (OUP). He has authored and edited several books, including Environmental Integration in Competition and Free-Movement Laws  (OUP 2016), Intersections Between Corporate and Antitrust Law (eds. with Marco Corradi) (CUP 2024), Research Handbook on Sustainability and Competition Law  (ed) (Edward Elgar 2024), and Global Antitrust and Sustainability: law, economics, enforcement (OUP forthcoming 2024/25). 

Julian earned his Master’s degree (MSt) and doctorate (DPhil) from the University of Oxford. He also completed an LLM in European Legal Studies at Durham University and undergraduate law studies in Germany and Austria. At Lund University, he was the director of the master’s programme in European Business Law and taught courses on competition and various areas of EU law. Julian also taught EU law and competition law at Oxford and gave lectures and seminars on EU law, comparative law, and competition law in various European, Asian, and Latin American universities and institutions.

Julian is a qualified lawyer in Germany, with professional training that focused on competition law. He completed placements at the German Competition Authority’s international co-operation unit, the European Commission (DG Comp, cartels unit), and Allen & Overy’s German Antitrust unit in Hamburg. 

Julian can be found on LinkedIn, SSRN, and Twitter/X.