See something, Say Something

ALL TRANSLATIONS ON THIS SITE ARE UNOFFICIAL AND ARE PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY. THESE TRANSLATIONS ARE CREATED AND CONTINUOUSLY UPDATED BY USERS –THEY ARE FREE TO VIEW, BUT PROPER ATTRIBUTION IS REQUIRED FOR DISTRIBUTION OF THESE OR DERIVATIVE TRANSLATIONS. PAGES WITHOUT IMAGES ARE WORKS IN PROGRESS.

English中文(简体)

Recently, China Law Translate published a translation of new Beijing rules encouraging citizens to report potential spies and collect sizable bounties. Unsurprisingly, this story fascinated many,and various news agencies around the world picked it up. Urging neighbors to keep an eye on each other, especially on foreign neighbors, invokes a paranoia-fueled dystopia — when it happens in China.

But what about somewhere like the U.S.? Look at the following statutory text:

18 U.S. Code § 3071

(b) With respect to acts of espionage involving or directed at the United States, the Attorney General may reward any individual who furnishes information—

(1) leading to the arrest or conviction, in any country, of any individual or individuals for commission of an act of espionage against the United States;

(2) leading to the arrest or conviction, in any country, of any individual or individuals for conspiring or attempting to commit an act of espionage against the United States; or

(3) leading to the prevention or frustration of an act of espionage against the United States.

18 U.S. Code § 3072

The Attorney General shall determine whether an individual furnishing information described in section 3071 is entitled to a reward and the amount to be paid.

Prior to 2002 amendment. section 3072 capped rewards at $500,000, and required presidential approval for rewards over $100,000; but presumably more flexibility was needed.

This is not to say that Beijing’s rules are OK just because the US has similar authority. It certainly isn’t meant to say that nobody should report critically on the Beijing rules just because the US has has similar authority. If something is worthy of criticism, or ridicule, it should always be pointed out, regardless of where it happens, or where the critic is from.

What I like most about comparative law research is that it makes me look back on my own system with fresh eyes. In learning about a foreign legal system, I reflect back on our own ways of doing things. Differences make me question whether our methods make sense. Just as commonly, I sometimes notice that a problem in the foreign system exists in our system as well– but it took the outsider perspective to draw my attention to it.

Putting aside preconceptions is hard, maybe impossible, but I hope that looking abroad is a way of helping escape bias, not reinforce it.

About Jeremy Daum 111 Articles
Jeremy Daum is a Senior Fellow of the Yale Law School Paul Tsai China Center, based in Beijing, with over a decade of experience working in China on collaborative legal reform projects. His principal research focus is criminal procedure law, with a particular emphasis on protections of vulnerable populations such as juveniles and the mentally ill in the criminal justice system, and is also an authority on China’s ‘Social Credit System’. Jeremy has spoken about these issues at universities throughout China and in the U.S.; and has co-authored a book on U.S. Capital Punishment Jurisprudence for Chinese readers. He is also the founder and contributing editor of the collaborative translation and commentary site Chinalawtranslate.com, dedicated to improving mutual understanding between legal professionals in China and abroad. He translates, writes, edits, does web-design, graphic design, billing, tech support, and social media outreach for China Law Translate.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*