With nine main theses that are interspersed with each other, this paper explores and articulates some of the most important questions in natural law theory. The theses include: I. In investigating facts, one finds reasons to choose an honest self-discipline; II. Deliberating, one finds reasons similarly directing one to other intrinsic goods; III. Taken integrally, these goods and principles acquire the force of moral precepts; IV. Those precepts, natural moral law, depict our nature (humanity) in its flourishing; V. Nature and natures are best explained by free, intelligent transcendent creation; VI. Creation and other gifts past and present deserve our gratitude; VII. Natural moral law and historical revelation are two channels of information; VIII. Secular and spiritual communities are distinct and respectfully self-governing; IX. Natural moral law defines human rights but rightfully extends beyond them.
The adjudication and amnesty system in the Song Dynasty has been thoroughly researched by academia, but the annual death penalty numbers have not been credibly determined due to insufficient and disorganized historical records. The period’s policy that no innocent person would be executed was based on the double-digit record of capital punishments for Zhenguan during the Tang Dynasty, and the execution number was adjusted accordingly. As a special procedure, Zoucai (a request for judgment) was used to reduce the death penalty numbers. The value of human life, concern about excessive execution, and trimming of the capital punishment regime resulted in conversations between the emperors and their officials about the death penalty, which allowed the law that executed capital punishments during the Song Dynasty to strike a proper balance between justice, efficiency, and mercy, while avoiding rigidity and abuse.
In answering three important questions related to natural law, this paper offers a coherent explanation of the market. We argue that the market, rather than a mechanism that simply serves narrow self-interests, finds its legitimacy in the ethical origins of the market order. The need for law to support and sustain the market, including by imposing necessary limits on the freedom of the market players, flows from those ethical origins.
Even though fiduciary duties take the highest position in the spectrum of legal altruism, and legal fiduciary altruism sometimes differs from moral fiduciary altruism, natural law morality is not necessarily useless in helping to explain, determine, and justify concrete rules in fiduciary law. Five specific inspirations, in addition to divergences, can be drawn by a closer look at the seven basic goods of John Finnis’ natural law theory. First, the basic good of life may help to determine the boundary of the best interest test under the duty of loyalty. Second, the basic good of play, in particular the distinction between business community and play community may help to justify the separate treatment between civil agency and commercial agency regarding the unconditional power of immediate termination. Third, practical reasonableness may help to explain the rule against set-off under the duty of no conflict. Fourth, different cultural notions of sociability may lead to distinct understandings with regard to the no-profit rule. Fifth, different attitudes towards knowledge in various religious beliefs may create distinct understandings about the burden of informed consent.
A new concept of “legal infrastructure” has recently been emerging and becoming increasingly popular in China. The concept offers a novel analytical framework to explore China’s existing legal organism for creativity. For this academic mission, the perspective of venture capital is developed by this article in that it has been already been convincingly demonstrated by extant studies that venture capital is an indispensable catalyst for the output level of a country’s creativity. The findings of this article are that the current legal infrastructure in China impedes the life cycle of venture capital, to some degree, and in turn impairs the capability of creativity in China’s economy.
The issue of corruption has attracted increasing attention in the study and practice of international investment law during recent years. After taking prudent consideration of the corruption defense invoked by the host states in some international investment arbitration cases involved with corruption, International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) tribunals accordingly determined the final awards. However, some parts of the arbitral jurisprudence aroused strong criticism, especially with regard to the ICSID tribunals’ reasoning that arbitrators have no jurisdiction over corruption-tainted international investments. The ICSID tribunals are legitimately supposed to exercise their jurisdiction and are lawfully obliged to probe into the nature of corrupt activities. The tribunals are strongly expected to adopt a balanced approach in deciding the merits and fairly weighing the obligations, rights, and interests of both disputing parties. It is preferable to strengthen the collaborative interaction between ICSID proceedings and domestic anti-corruption enforcement mechanisms when it comes to combating corrupt international investment activities. Existing international treaties (or specific treaty provisions) on combating corruption in international business transactions and calling for international cooperation, alongside domestic anti-corruption enforcement legislation, have actually laid solid legal foundations for the establishment of such an anti-corruption coordinative mechanism between ICSID and domestic corruption regulatory authorities on the global level.