Professor Donald Clarke testified before the Congressional-Executive Commission on China on recent developments in the relationship between weiquan (维权, “rights-upholding”) lawyers and the state.

 http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/dclarke/p…

from 163.com news. http://focus.news.163.com/09/1019/08/5LV…

清华大学聘冯象为首任“梅汝璈法学讲席教授”

2009年10月15日，清华大学在明理楼模拟法庭隆重举行“梅汝璈法学讲席教授”签约暨聘任仪式。著名旅美法学家冯象博 士受聘担任“梅汝璈法学讲席教授”。清华大学法学院顾问委员会主任、最高人民检察院前检察长贾春旺、清华大学前党委书记、清华大学教育基金会理事长贺美英 等出席签约仪式，清华大学党委副书记韩景阳，江苏新华发集团有限公司董事长孙志华、梅汝璈先生之子梅小璈，梅汝璈法学讲席教授冯象，清华大学法学院院长王 振民出席并致辞。清华大学相关部门负责同志、清华大学法学院部分师生百余人参加仪式。清华大学法学院副院长黎宏主持。

仪式上，清华大学教育基金会秘书长黄建华、江苏新华发集团有限公司董事长孙志华、清华大学法学院院长王振民代表各方签字。韩景阳同志代表清华大学为冯象博士颁发“梅汝璈法学讲席教授”聘书。

签约仪式后，清华大学校长顾秉林院士在工字厅西厅亲切会见了冯象博士、梅小璈先生、孙志华董事长。

据悉，江苏新华发集团有限公司捐款1200万元设立“新华发——梅汝璈法学讲席教授基金”。韩景阳同志在讲话中对江苏新华发集团有限公司和孙志 华先生的慷慨捐助表达了衷心感谢。孙志华先生在讲话中，表达了一个企业家对国家法治建设和法学教育事业的支持，这充分体现了企业和企业家的社会责任意识。

利用社会资源，设立冠名讲习讲授，吸引世界一流学者任教，是国际一流大学行之有效的经验。为了吸引优秀学者来清华大学法学院任教，在孙志华先生 慷慨赞助下，清华大学决定以清华校友、著名法官梅汝璈的名字来命名该讲席职位。梅汝璈先生1916－1924年在清华学校学习，1924年考取清华公费赴 美留学项目，入读斯坦福大学，1926年以优异成绩获得文学士学位。同年进入芝加哥大学法学院学习，1928年获得芝加哥大学法律博士学位。回国后他从事 法律教育和研究工作，1946年被中国政府指派为远东国际军事法庭法官，在这场世纪大审判中为中国人民和人类的正义事业奋力拼争，出色完成了国家和历史交 付的庄严使命，使日本帝国主义的首要战犯得到了应有的惩罚。梅汝璈先生曾经说过，“受了清华的教育，就意味着对国家、民族应当有什么样的担当。”用梅汝璈 先生的名字来命名该教职，其目的就是希望新一代清华法律人能够学习、继承梅汝璈先生对法治和公平正义的执着追求、对人类和平进步事业的庄严承诺以及他高尚 的爱国情操。

冯象先生少年负笈云南边疆，是北京大学英美文学硕士、哈佛大学中古文学博士（Ph.D）和耶鲁大学法律博士（J.D）。曾经任教于香港大学，并 在北京大学、哈佛大学和华东师范大学担任客座、兼职教授。他的研究领域跨越法学和文学，发表了很多有份量的文章，出版了很多具有很大影响的法学和文学作 品。冯象博士精通十数种语言，包括希腊文、意大利语、希伯莱文、拉丁文、古拉丁文、俄语、法语、古法语、德语、英语、古英语、中古英语、威尔士语、古冰岛 语及亚兰语等。他已经于2009年10月正式到清华大学法学院任教。

利用社会资源设立“梅汝璈法学讲席教授”，是清华大学法学院迎接2011年百年校庆人才引进的一个重大举措，该讲习的设立和冯象教授的加盟对清华大学建设世界一流法学院必将发挥重要作用。

from http://www.law.tsinghua.edu.cn/web2008/a…

[An abstract jurisprudence question--what is law--plays a significant role in deciding whether President Obama lied when he said his proposed changes to health insurance laws would not give coverage to illegal immigrants. Does law mean those written in statutes? Or does law mean those ACTUALLY enforced by court and administration? See the following story. ]

Wikipedia’s Rapid Reaction to Outburst During Obama Speech

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images Rep. Joe Wilson heckling President Barack Obama during a presidential address to Congress on Wednesday.

If journalism is the first draft of history, what is a Wikipedia entry when it is updated within minutes of an event to reflect changes in a person’s biography?

This is the very live issue that cropped up in a heated argument on the discussion page that accompanies Wikipedia’s entry on Representative Joe Wilson Wednesday night, just 30 minutes after the Republican from South Carolina interrupted President Barack Obama’s speech by shouting “You lie!” As my colleague Carl Hulse reported in a blog post published about 10 minutes after the fight got going on Wikipedia, Mr. Wilson’s outburst came in response to the president’s statement that his proposed changes to health insurance laws would not give coverage to illegal immigrants.

(more…)

The following text is from the opinion of Gagliardi v. Trifoods International, Inc., delivered by Chancellor William T. Allen:

“I start with what I take to be an elementary precepts of corporate law: in the absence of facts showing self-dealing or improper motive, a corporate officer or director is not legally responsible to the corporation for losses that may be suffered as a result of a decision that an officer made or that directors authorized in good faith.

“… Obviously, it is in the shareholders’ economic interest to offer suffcient protection to directors from liability for negligence, etc., to allow directors to conclude that, as a practical matter, there is no risk that, if they act in good faith and meet minimal proceduralist standards of attention, they can face liability as as rsult of a business loss.”

What exactly is the shareholders’ economic interest in shielding directors from negligence (practically all negligence you can imagine)? Isn’t it the shareholders’ economic interest to motivate managers to reduce negligent behaviors? One may argue that if managers are legally obliged to avoid negligent behaviors, they will choose risk-averse management style which would damage shareholder’s interest. BUT no social science has proved such result yet. Plus, shareholders are theoretically still able to fire those risk-averse managers, therefore managers may not do so.

The shareholders’ economic interest is a myth. When a court is telling the shareholder that the court will rule for the manager who harmed him for his economic interest, it is not only claiming that the shareholder is a fool, but also that there is a myth about his own economic interest–and DON’T ask any more.

Pictures

Chinese citizen can have freedom of speech if and only if it does not embarrass the government, said a Beijing prosecutor Zong Yuan through Beijing Daily, commenting on Chinese government’s arrest of a citizen Liu Yiming for he had questioned in public whether some local Zhejiang officials in a high-profile case had manipulated criminal justice to favor a rich suspect. Here is the full quote:

In our everyday life, it is understandable that ordinary citizens express their unsatisfactory feelings because of their distrust or misunderstanding of some administrative agencies. The government’s tolerance of these criticism shows our social progress and the confidence of our government. As long as it does not cause severe consequence or harm social stability, there should be nothing wrong for ordinary citizens to say something about their unsatisfactory or express a little criticism of the government.   But if it causes any chaotic result, that is a different story.

(Original text:

在日常生活中，普通民众出于对某些行政机关的不信任或误解，偶尔说些牢骚话发泄不满，是可以理解的。宽容对待民众对政府机关的各种批评，既体现了社会的进 步，也是表现政府的自信和勤勉。普通民众批评政府几句，责骂政府几句，只要没有造成严重后果，没有危害社会稳定，又有何不可？但真的造成混乱后果，则当别 论。)