The incorporation of
internet to the leadership of China has led to a great change in the legal
system of the country. It has promoted the justice system since judges are able
to access the internet to seek for guidance about dealing with cases. It has
also laid a platform for activists to argue political matters concerning the
state which should be modified.However, this has opened chances for contesting
of various parties concerning what is right and the kind of leadership which
the citizens of the state view as being favorable to them. The leaders in the
legal system of the country face challenges from activists who use the internet
to anticipate for change and enlighten other members of the society to
demonstrate against decisions made by their government.
Internet was fully incorporated in to the systems of the
state of China in 1994 in order to promote the socialist market economy. However,
this decision led to intrusion of other effects from external parties into the
internet project.It led to integration of communication through social networks
in the state which resulted to formation of movements to protest against some
decisions made by their government. Activists used the Internet largely to
enlighten the locals about the unfair decisions made by the government and advise
them about the revolutionary measures which should be taken to ensure better
leadership. Since 1994, the justice system of China has been largely affected
by the Internet through being influenced by other elites worldwide on the best
methods of leadership which they should consider using. Though Internet has led
to significant changes in the country, the Republic of China has taken measures
to secure its decisions from being controlled entirely by the Internet sources.
The government introduced censorship of internet which
ensured that it had control over the communications which were being made
through the Internet sources. According to Amnesty International, The Republic
China registered the largest number of prisoners who are
accused of using the Internet to incite the public. Most the cases which these
imprisoners are accused of include; inciting the public to demonstrate against
corruption of their government, communicating with other activists outside the
country, and signing of online petitions. The government was forced to make
policies which govern communication through Internet sources due to the
immergence of a high number of protests which were aimed at influencing the
government to change its methods of governance.
The government has taken control over provision of
information through the internet hence affecting the boldness in communication
between the local people because of the fear of being arrested. For instance,
in 2001 Wang Xiaoning, a Chinese activist, was arrested because of posting
anonymous information on the Internet through his Yahoo Mail Account. He was
then sentenced for 10 years imprisonment which scared other activists who were
anticipating for change in the leadership of the country.In 2008, Liu Shaokun,
who was a teacher in Sichuan Province, was sentenced to one year of correction
through labor because of inciting disturbance. He was accused of writing
information through the Internet which caused unrest among the members of the
society. Shaokun had posted information about the misery which was facing the
children who were injured during collapsing of school buildings.
However, the efforts of the Chinese government to control
all communications through the Internet have not fully eliminated the work of
the activists to enlighten the members of the society. Bloggers and other
Internet users have employed use of coded information which seems to hold
simple literal meanings but it triggers a lot of reasoning to the readers. They
communicate as if they intend to praise the government of its good governance
but incorporate sections of recommendations. These sections help to expose the uninformed
decisions which were made by the government to the society using a polite way.
According to researchers from university of California
and New Mexico, censorship cannot act as a perfect firewall to control
communications through the Internet. They have shown that there are a lot of
communications which pass unnoticed because the screening is impacted on few
components of the servers. Therefore, the Chinese government has not fully
secured all communication systems on the Internet to ensure that the citizens
abide to the set laws.State Legitimacy can only be promoted through advising
the local people through the Internet to follow the correct channels in order
to present their claims to the government. This would make them to stop relying
on activists for advice entirely hence minimizing the likelihood of emergence
of rebel movements.
Internet has exposed the Chinese law courts to public
scrutiny were by the decisions in various cases are influenced by other
officials, the media and also individual protesters who have different opinions
from the ones held by the judges. Therefore, people are allowed to protest
against certain rulings made by the court hence making the cases to be set for
another hearing.The evaluation ofjudges has also been based on interests of
their superiors and not according to the justice standards of the state. This
has manipulated them to make decisions according to the majority opinions in
order to maintain their jobs.
The government has been forced to consider the popular
opinions in the state even though they have applied censorship of internet
communications. This is aimed at ensuring stability in their governance since
going against the majority opinion would result to conflicts. Therefore, the
Chinese legal system has been based upon interests of the powerful people in
the society. This has denied the judges a chance to work independently hence
impairing the efforts to ensure justice to all citizens regardless of their
social class. The Internet has only provided a chance for activism to the few
elites who are courageous to declare their stand regardless of the reaction of
the government. This has forced it to consider the recommendations which are
proposed by the citizens.
It has also become hard for the Chinese legal systemto
make rulings according to the provisions of their constitution since it is
being influenced by other external forces. For instance, the judges are allowed
to access the Internet to seek guidanceabout how other judges in other
countries dealt with similar cases as they are presented with. This makes them
to deviate from their constitution and copy other nations in order to settle
disputes in the society. The effectiveness of the Chinese courts has been
affected significantly since they cannot be trusted in ensuring justice to
members of the high social class. The government prohibited the judges from
making rulings which would interfere with the social stability in the country.
Therefore, any cases triggering class action in China are rejected by the
courts. This makes the low and the middle class members to lose trust in their
state’s justice system.
The contest for state legitimacy in China is mostly
between the political elites which form the ruling class and other activists in
the society who anticipate for better governance. The struggle for promoting
law abidingness among the citizens has taken different dimensions though the
government tries to incorporate the systems for ease of monitoring. There has
been struggle for dominance of control of information between the ruling class
and other elites in the society. The government has ensured that the use of
Internet is not directed towards intimidating the government or inciting
members of the society. However, even after establishing policies to govern the
use of Internet, this has not discouraged activists from protesting against
uninformed decisions which are made by the government.
The government seems to have achieved little in the
contests since censoring the Internet acted as a confirmation to the entire
society that there are evil deeds which it is protecting from being exposed.
Therefore, this has made it easier for the activists to win the majority
support and manipulate the government to consider making fair decisions.
Conclusion
Internet has transformed the legal system of the state
and modified the decision making process to include opinions of third parties.
Though it has interfered with the loyalty of the state to its constitutions, it
has promoted making of cautious decisions in order to avoid conflicts in the
society. The move is also based on the selfish interests of the government to
ensure ease of governance by eliminating opposition which may be initiated by
activists through the social networks.
References
Asharf, and Richard. John Locke: Critical
Assessments. London: Routledge, 1991.
Dahl, and Robert. Polyachy: Participation and Opposition.
London: Yale University Press, 1971.
Dogan, and Mattei. Conceptions of Legitimacy, Encyclopedia
of Gevernment and Politics. London: Routledge, 2003.
Lipset, and Seymour Martin. Political Man: The Social
Bases of Political. London: Heinemann, 1983.
Sternberger, and Dolf. Legitimacy: International
Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan, 1968.
No comments:
Post a Comment