.jpg)
Abstract: The following sections are included in this chapter: Introduction, Institutional Constraints of Judicial Decision-Making in Divorce Disputes, Gendered Judicial Practices in Divorce Disputes, Gendered Lawyering, Conclusion, References, Statutes Cited
Congratulations to Professor Xin He on his recent conferral of the title Chair Professor at The University of Hong Kong. The title is a mark of distinction as the President wrote in his conferment letter to Professor He:
"At this University, a Chair Professor title is reserved for world-class scholars of distinction. It signifies due recognition of outstanding academic leadership and excellence. As a top-rated researcher and academic leader, you are held in high regard by your peers globally, and your significant contributions and accomplishments have received international acclaim."
Professor He is now only one of four Chair Professors in the Faculty of Law. He was appointed to the Mok Sau-King Professorship in Law at the University of Hong Kong in 2024 and his latest monograph The Judicial System of China was published by Oxford University Press in November 2024. For more information on Professor He's research outputs and impact, click here.
On May 9, 2025, the Law and Society Association at Stanford Law School (LSAS) successfully held its Ninth Conference for Junior Researchers. The conference provided a forum for junior researchers to share their current research projects on law and society and receive input from faculty and other participants.
The focus of the conference was on the intersections of law, power, and reform, particularly in systems undergoing rapid political or social transformation. In particular, the conference explored how courts navigate these transformations, and the roles legal actors play in resisting or facilitating change.
Xin He, HKU Mok Sau-King Professor in Law and member of Philip K.H. Wong Centre for Chinese Law, was invited to deliver the keynote speech titled “A State Perspective on China’s Rights Development” at the conference. Emeritus Professor Lawrence M. Friedman from Stanford Law School delivered a warm opening remark, welcoming Professor He back to his alma mater and congratulating him on his achievements in the field of sociology of law, particularly in comparative Chinese legal studies.
In his keynote speech, Professor He introduced a viewpoint that diverges from the dominant rights mobilization approach, arguing that a state perspective and especially the dynamics between the state apparatuses offer crucial insights on China rights development. Professor He elaborated on this perspective through examples from several key areas of justice and explored the significance of the state perspective by comparing China with other authoritarian states. He noted the contrast with many authoritarian countries where law often opposes the state, pointing out that China’s legal system closely serves state interests. The extensive control of judges, courts, and legislative processes by the state highlights the unique context of China’s law and politics.
Participants in the conference included Stanford Law School professors such as Lawrence M. Friedman, Amalia D. Kessler, Deborah R. Hessler, Curtis J. Milhaupt, and Henry T. Greely. The attendees also included promising young scholars from academic institutions like Yale University, Duke University, the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of California, Los Angeles.
Abstract: In this examination of domestic violence protection orders in two lower-level Chinese courts, the interpretation of gender violence with respect to political concerns for social stability plays an essential role in the law’s effectiveness. In an urbanized coastal area court, judges see gender violence as a direct threat to social stability. To maintain stability, they facilitate claims against gender violence. Conversely, in a rural court, judges view gender violence as a direct threat to family stability. To maintain family stability, which is closely linked to social stability, they suppress claims against gender violence. This study proposes that, when global discourses are reformulated, new forms of cultural and political appropriation emerge. It highlights the complexities that arise when law, culture, and politics intermingle in the process of law and globalization. Understanding these complexities is crucial for addressing challenges in implementing global legal reforms at the local level and ensuring protection against gender violence.
'China's volatile style of policymaking is deeply ingrained in its authoritarian governance system, where regulatory authorities need to adhere to central policy initiatives and administrative power is subject to few institutional constraints.'
~ Dr Angela Huyue Zhang
"Men Win Out in Divorce in China"
Professor He Xin's research shows that a combination of institutional constraints on Chinese judges, traditional values about gender, and income inequality frequently result in divorce decisions that are more favourable to men than women.
'The judges follow strictly the law and the instructions of the Supreme People’s Court and they think their decisions are neutral. But they are ignoring the underlying socioeconomic inequality between the two genders, which affects the outcomes.'
~ Professor He Xin
Divorce in China: Institutional Constraints and Gendered Outcomes was published by NYU Press in 2021.'Technology has become the major driver of our economic, cultural and political life. We have to talk about access to technology as a human right so that everybody can benefit and we can prevent serious harm caused by improper application of the technology.'
~ Dr Haochen Sun
In 2004, while conducting fieldwork at a local court in southern China, legal scholar He Xin struck up a casual conversation with a judge. On the subject of challenges he faced in the job, the judge grumbled about his law school education, which he characterized as focused more on teaching how the law was written in books, rather than the “law in action.” “Why did no professor mention that, in divorce cases for instance, Chinese courts had made a habit of rejecting almost all first attempts to file?” the judge asked. “It’s not until they file again that the petition will be processed.”
The conversation started He on a decade-long journey through the weeds of Chinese divorce law. The product of these efforts, Divorce in China: Institutional Constraints and Gendered Outcomes, was published by New York University Press this year. In the book, He draws on a wide range of empirical evidence from court audits and judge interviews to demonstrate how the enforcement of China’s Marriage Law — the first law passed after the Communist Party of China founded the People’s Republic in 1949 — has diverged from its original intention of protecting women’s rights to marry and divorce. Responsible for handling cases efficiently and maintaining social stability, judges often choose to broker a deal that can be accepted by both parties, rather than issue a ruling that holds one or the other responsible. In practice, this has led to drawn-out legal proceedings, the trivialization of serious problems like domestic violence, and an inability or unwillingness to protect women’s custody rights. ...Click here to read the full article.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Impact:
- Xin He’s book is a monumental achievement— drawing on close observation of courts in two very different regions of China as well as a deep engagement with a broad range of scholarly literature, both China specific and more general, about gender, judging, authoritarianism and much more. Divorce in China will be a classic, both as concerns its immediate subject, and state and society in China in general. ~William P. Alford, Jerome A. and Joan L. Cohen Professor of East Asian Legal Studies, Harvard Law School
- An excellent and absorbing examination, based in substantial part on fieldwork sources, of the handling of divorce cases in China today. Xin He builds on his earlier impressive analyses of divorce litigation and gender to offer very important insights into law and gender in the People's Republic. In this important book he concludes that, sadly, the divorce decision-making process in and around the courts has tended to buttress rather than relieve long-standing prejudices against women in contemporary Chinese society. This study is essential reading for all those concerned with social and legal developments in the PRC today. ~Michael Palmer, University of London
Dr Clement Chen, Accountability in Algorithm-assisted Sanctions: Public Law Scrutiny of China’s Social Credit System, $705,920
Prof Frank He Xin, The Personal Safety Protection Order against Domestic Violence in China, $924,000
Prof Lusina Ho, A Comprehensive Examination of Judicial Practice on the Chinese Trust Law, $650,064
Ms Rebecca Lee, Rebuilding Trust and Legitimacy for Charities in Hong Kong, $375,000
Dr Michael Ng, Liberating Hong Kong: The awakening of freedom of expression and the rule of law in British Hong Kong (1978-1997), $591,400
Dr Marco Wan, The Construction of Sexual Minority Identities in Legal and Political Discourse in Hong Kong, $585,080
