Law's application, not debate, is the key

Never has rule of law been talked about so much in China's modern history. This is all because of the fourth plenary session of the 18th Party Central Committee in October, which for the first time in the history of its national plenary sessions made "governing according to law" its major topic.

But the paradox is the more the rule of law becomes a hot topic in public discourse, the more explicit it becomes that more needs to be done to turn it into a reality. Yet what makes China's rule of law different from its counterpart in the West are the modifiers: that it is under the leadership of the Communist Party of China and with Chinese characteristics.

This means that the establishment of the rule of law should never be meant to challenge the ruling position of the Communist Party of China. Instead, the rule of law will try to make as many leading officials as possible perform their duties in accordance with the law, which will help consolidate the leading position of the Party as a result.

When it comes to the Chinese characteristics, the political system - with the National People's Congress as its legislative house and Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference as the top advisory senator-like council and the judicial institutions under the NPC that are of key importance to the rule of law - are different from those of the United States and other Western countries.

The question of which is higher, the law (the Constitution) or the Party, has been raised by some to challenge the earnestness of the authorities when they are talking about the rule of law. The rule of law, they believe, will never be what it should unless the law is placed above the Party.

What is tricky is that not only is the assumption, on which the discussion is based, that the CPC as the ruling Party will undoubtedly stand in the way of rule of law, arbitrary, but that by extrapolating the misdeeds and violations of the law by some Party and government leaders to the entire ruling Party, it gives people the impression that the entire political institutional framework is rotten and needs to be replaced.