The Implications of International Human Rights Law on China's Protection of Minority Language Rights

Abstract

This thesis analyses how international human rights law (IHRL) influences China’s domestic protection of minority language rights by dissecting the factors obstructing its application and providing an alternative pathway in soft law to overcome these impediments. Using a desk-based and documentary analysis methodology, the thesis’s unique standpoint examining human rights development as a dialectic, evolutionary process contributes to the understanding and promotion of minority linguistic rights not only in China, but also in other multiethnic countries. The thesis argues that soft law, due to its inherent ‘softness’, provides a realistic, if less than optimal, pathway to integrate IHRL in a totalitarian State. The thesis’s contribution is significant as it challenges the canon perception that mere narratives can bring no concrete progress to a State’s human rights situation. The thesis shows that soft law provides a strong narrative function that creates and develops compelling counter-narratives to State-propagated notions of nationalism and international oversight, informing public opinion and creating public space for academic discussion that is essential to the integrating process of IHRL. The thesis first presents the conflicting interests and the inability to provide mitigating mechanisms to reconcile domestic and international commitments in IHRL and China’s current legal systems. It finds that illiberal trends in politics, combined with the inherent hostility of China’s polity towards cultural diversity, mean that direct incorporation of IHRL is impossible. China’s three National Human Rights Action Plans are examined as proof of the viability of soft law to function as the mitigating mechanism needed to overcome the inadequacies of both the domestic and international systems. The thesis refutes the common critique that only hard law reform can provide human rights development due to its punitive nature in the face of violation. As the Xinjiang case study demonstrates, without the necessary democratic architecture, any law, hard or soft, suffers from a lack of restraining power. The inherent softness of soft law is therefore not necessarily a defect, but an advantage to help it manoeuvre around unfavourable domestic circumstances, eventually facilitating the domestic influence of IHRL to protect minority language rights in China and other illiberal systems.