Abstract
Compared with Taizu (r. 960-976), the “Treatise on Criminal Law” in the History of Song emphasized Taizong’s (r. 976-997) legislative construction in the judicial system, his image as a diligent and experienced judge, and his preference for institutionalizing adjudication of individual cases. These are fairly accurate albeit incomprehensive characterizations. They fall short of showing Taizong’s institutional construction in the non-criminal field and the administration of judicial officials, his changing attitudes when dealing with the connection between pardon and finance, his vacillating views on intransigence and compromise in regional legislation, rationality-tinted thought amid heaven-humanity interactions. The “Treatise on Criminal Law” in the History of Song also looks at some predicaments in the rule by law faced by Taizong, such as conflict between supervision mechanism and principles of efficiency and allocation of responsibilities, as well as distorted legislative intent in legal practices. However, more attention should be warranted to the following: Taizong listening to opinions widely resulted in the loss of a stable institution; “institutionalization” of individual cases resulted in the lack of systemic legislation; and strengthening of a supervision mechanism resulted in the waste of judicial resources. All of these are the result of the arbitrariness of monarchical power.
Keywords
Song Taizong, “Treatise on Criminal Law” in the History of Song, legal accomplishments, predicaments of rule by law
Cite
Citations are generated automatically from bibliographic data as a convenience, and may not be complete or accurate.
