Rethinking the Factors Affecting the Prohibition and Prevention of Torture in China—A Qualitative Comparative Analysis
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13026118 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Mingming Hai (0000-0002-9780-6849, University of Macau, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 257-257 |
| Publication date | 2023-04-23 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Sciences (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2076-0760 • E-ISSN: 2076-0760 |
| Publisher | MDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT) |
| DOI | 10.3390/socsci12050257 |
| OpenAlex | W4366828754 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 35 |
As China continues to intensify its judicial reform efforts, there are multiple factors that influence the prohibition and prevention of torture in China. This issue leads to the main research question of the article: what factors influence the protection of human rights in China to achieve the prohibition and prevention of torture? This paper uses fuzzy set (fs)/qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to explore how the configurations of multiple factors influence the establishment of a strong human rights protection system, to achieve effective torture prevention and prohibition in China. This article will focus on the cases of torture that have been made public (1998–2021). When considering how to build a strong human rights protection system to achieve the prohibition and prevention of torture, it is necessary to identify the most effective combination of cooperation with international monitoring bodies, transparency, legislation and judicial practice, attention allocation on torture cases and independent monitoring bodies for torture prevention. The analysis concludes that: (1) there are three ways of configuration to establish effective torture prevention and prohibition, (2) active engagement with international monitoring bodies is key to establishing a high level of human rights protection, particularly concerning China’s current mechanisms, and (3) the three types of configurations also provide solutions for future policy and decision-makers in China. This study contributes to demonstrates the benefits of fs/QCA in testing the complementarity of judicial practice and provides conceptual and empirical evidence for previously understudied factors
China · Complementarity (molecular biology · Human rights · Interrogation · Law and economics · Legislation · Political science · Qualitative comparative analysis · Sociology · Torture · Computer Science · Law · Political Conflict and Governance · Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
Studying Complex Interactions and Outcomes Through Qualitative Comparative Analysis
Chinese Legal Reform and the Global Legal Order
Substitutes or Complements? A Configurational Examination of Corporate Governance Mechanisms
Qualitative Comparative Analysis using Fuzzy Sets (fsQCA)
Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) as an Approach
Qualitative Comparative Analysis Using R
Configurational Theory and Methods in Organizational Research
Research Handbook on Torture
Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences
Excluding tortured confessions in the People's Republic of China
Exclusion of illegally obtained confessions in China
Judicial Transparency as Judicial Centralization
May Government Ever Use Torture? Two Responses from German Law
British Torture, Then and Now
Crisp-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (csQCA), Contradictions and Consistency Benchmarks for Model Specification
Towards judicial transparency in China
Precedents and Chinese Judges
Designing Research With Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA)
Standards of Good Practice in Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Fuzzy-Sets
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |