Abstract: Along with the successful progress of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in the past decade and more, the rule of law for the BRI has improved substantially, becoming a dazzling landscape in the international rule of law. At present, the world is undergoing major changes unseen in a century, with intensified geopolitical confrontation in international relations and the serious undermining of the systems of global economic governance and multilateral rules. In the face of the complex and volatile international situation, the BRI as an international public good cannot remain unaffected, and the rule of law for the BRI inevitably faces greater risks and challenges. China should work with the participating countries of the BRI to overcome difficulties, utilize international rule of law thinking, discuss scientific plans to address the risks and challenges of the rule of law for the BRI, and build an innovative development pathway for the BRI rule of law, sharing the institutional dividends created by the rule of law for the BRI and promoting reforms that align with the times in the global economic governance system.

Keywords: rule of law, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), international rule of law, innovative pathway

 

In 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed the cooperative initiative of building the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road during his visits to Kazakhstan and Indonesia, thereby launching the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a great project for global economic and trade cooperation and development in the 21st century. Over the past decade, the concept of BRI cooperation has been widely recognized, and the construction of the project has advanced and has achieved remarkable results. Currently, the BRI has basically completed its overall layout on a global scale; its influence on the international economic and trade fields is increasing rapidly, making it an important force in promoting global economic and trade cooperation. The achievements of the BRI have not only demonstrated a new model of mutually beneficial cooperation between China and participating BRI countries, but have also provided new development opportunities for the international community, garnering widespread attention and praise.

The success of the BRI is inseparable from the construction of the BRI rule of law system and the stable and predictable business environment it has brought about. Plentiful practice in the course of BRI promotion has proven that the rule of law is a necessary precondition and a reliable foundation for its steady and long-term progress. In the future, the high- quality development of the BRI will undoubtedly require further consolidation of its rule of law foundation. Since the BRI was proposed, the Chinese government has attached great importance to the rule of law, and has worked with BRI participants to promote the BRI rule of law. President Xi Jinping has pointed out that, “The rule of law is necessary for the joint construction of the Belt and Road. China is willing to work with other countries to create a favorable environment for the rule of law, build a fair, reasonable and transparent international economic and trade system, and promote the high-quality development of the joint construction of the Belt and Road for the betterment of the people of all countries.”[1]

After more than a decade of efforts, the construction of the BRI rule of law has taken shape and achieved substantial results. As of January 2023, China had signed more than 200 intergovernmental cooperation documents for the BRI with  151 countries and 32 international organizations, including bilateral or regional economic and trade agreements as well as memorandums of understanding on economic and trade cooperation. China and BRI participants have established a number of cooperation frameworks between commercial dispute settlement institutions and various forms of international legal service cooperation alliances, so that international commercial and investment disputes can be prevented or resolved in a timely manner, highlighting the unique characteristics and image of the rule of law of the BRI. Nowadays, the BRI has not only become an international public product that enhances the well-being of the people of participating countries and promotes global economic development, but has also provided a powerful impetus for bettering laws and governance in the global economic and trade field.[2]

Looking back over the past decade, the process of building the rule of law for the BRI has always been accompanied by various risks and challenges. As the world undergoes major changes unseen in a century accompanied by geopolitical confrontation in international relations, the international rule of law is in deep crisis, and the international environment facing the BRI rule of law has become even more complex due to the rising number of unfavorable external factors.[3] The Western bloc, led by the US, regards the historic rise in China’s overall strength as a geopolitical threat, and for the purpose of maintaining its long- standing hegemony, frequently adopts a variety of extreme policies and measures against China in an attempt to curb the country’s strong development momentum. A prominent manifestation of this is the continuous smearing, suppression and attacks on the BRI and use of all means to obstruct and sabotage its construction, as seen in the growing level of hostility towards China of the US Trump and Biden administrations in recent years.[4]

The outbreak of the pandemic in early 2020 and its continuation disrupted global economic and trade exchanges; the Ukraine crisis that broke out in 2022 triggered unprecedented unilateral economic sanctions against Russia by the West; and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that has continued since 2023 has resulted in a spillover of the crisis in the Middle East, posing significant risks to international shipping and product supply chains and causing great damage to already fragmented international economic and trade relations . These events have severely affected the global economic governance system and its rule of law: protectionism, unilateralism and hegemony are rampant on a global scale and the functions of the international economic organizations represented by the World Trade Organization (WTO) have been severely weakened, leading to increased uncertainty and instability in the international business environment and the continuous erosion of the global economic governance system and rule of law. In the face of such a hostile and crisis-ridden international environment, the future innovation and development of the BRI rule of law has become a crucial challenge for China and BRI participants.

Human history has often shown that serious crises can create opportunities for the progress of civilization. At present, China and BRI participants should jointly discuss scientific solutions to address the risks and challenges of the BRI by actively utilizing international thinking on the rule of law in order to build a new pathway for the high-quality development of the BRI under the rule of law and share the institutional dividends created by this initiative. The progress and development of the BRI rule of law will help overcome the international rule of law crisis in the global economic and trade sector and lead to innovative changes in global economic governance in line with the times.[5]

The BRI stands out as an international public good, with its development closely intertwined with the global economic and trade landscape. The rule of law for the BRI is also closely connected to the international legal frameworks governing global trade and economics. However, the geopolitical conflict targeting China initiated by the United States has extended beyond bilateral political and diplomatic relations to all aspects of global trade and commerce, shifting what were cooperative economic and trade relations into confrontational geoeconomic and trade relations.[6]

While normal economic and trade relations are cooperative in nature, geoeconomic and trade relations are usually confrontational and exist during a period when international economic and trade conflicts are growing in scale and becoming normality as a result of the unilateral and discriminatory trade policy measures that one party in a geopolitical conflict takes against the other. The most prominent feature of such relations is their disregard for the rule of law, transforming international economic and trade cooperation—ideally mutually beneficial—into a zero-sum game for the major powers.[7]   Currently, protectionism and unilateralism are widespread globally, with a proliferation of laws and policies restricting international trade and investment. “National security” has become a key justification for some countries to ignore multilateral economic and trade rules and to undertake frequent implementation of unilateral measures. The WTO Appellate Body’s ability to resolve trade disputes has weakened, leaving a large number of international trade disputes unresolved by the international rule of law. Additionally, regional conflicts have led to widespread unilateral sanctions, and enterprises across the world have to be extremely cautious if they are to avoid capture by the labyrinth of economic sanctions. In such circumstances, international economic organizations like the WTO, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank seem powerless to halt the deepening crisis of the international rule of law.[8]  The geoeconomic and trade relations arising from geopolitical relations have a great impact on the BRI rule of law, an impact manifested in the following three aspects.

Firstly, the deterioration of the general international rule of law environment has adversely affected the BRI rule of law. A large number of unilateral and protective measures implemented by major economies have led to the deterioration of the general environment for the rule of law in the international economic and trade sector, and the rule-based multilateral system on which the BRI rule of law relied has nearly collapsed. Voices questioning the role and function of the international rule of law continue to rise, and the law of the jungle is reviving in the international economic and trade field, which appreciates national strength more than international rules. The number of economic sanctions and counter-sanctions is spiraling upward globally, and some BRI participants are being held hostage, forced to make adjustments to their domestic policies or take retaliatory measures to safeguard their economic interests. These have become unfavorable external factors that threaten and undermine the rule of law for the BRI.

Secondly, the BRI rule of law must contend with the fragmented global economic governance system. The construction of the BRI requires China and participating countries to create a business environment based on the rule of law and reliant on robust laws and governance in global economic relations. However, due to the hegemonic and confrontational policies adopted by the US, international economic organizations like the WTO have been deeply affected by geoeconomic and trade conflicts. The WTO’s 2022 and 2024 ministerial meetings yielded no substantive negotiation results, and reforms at the IMF and the World Bank have also stagnated. The United States is seeking to intensify its “small yard, high fence” strategy in the economic and trade area, gradually severing the “supply chain” of international economic and trade rules. The global economic governance system which the BRI rule of law used to rely on is now fragmented, becoming an obstacle to the development of the BRI rule of law.

Thirdly, the development of the BRI rule of law is under pressure from Western countries  led by the United States. The US has adopted a “united front” strategy, engaging in “decoupling  and breaking down linkages” together with its Western allies in the international economic  and trade sector, and has continuously introduced so-called “de-risking” and “overcapacity” theories in violation of economic principles and market economy norms. They have also  inserted “poison pill clauses” in bilateral or regional economic and trade agreements aimed at  marginalizing China. Meanwhile, Western think tanks and public opinion have exaggerated  the debt issues of BRI participants, spreading false narratives like the “Belt and Road debt  trap” and “labor and environmental crises.”[9]  The US and Europe have recently launched a  series of alternative proposals in an attempt to divide and dismantle international cooperation  under the BRI. Consequently, BRI participants are facing enormous geopolitical and economic  pressures, which makes the task of the innovative development of the rule of law for the BRI  increasingly challenging.[10]

China and BRI participants must pay closer attention to the aforementioned risks and challenges. However, they should remain confident, uphold the principles of the international rule of law, and collaboratively explore the best solutions for preventing new risks and overcoming emerging challenges. This will ensure that the development of the BRI rule of law will be progressive and innovative.

To achieve the innovative development of the BRI rule of law, we need to establish its developmental dimensions, i.e., to clarify the design of its innovative pathways in terms of which angles, in what ways, and which issues should be pursued. Generally speaking, constructing a rule of law pathway focuses on preventing and resolving major risks. Therefore, clarifying and understanding the major risks faced by the BRI rule of law in the context of geoeconomic and trade relations should be the basic premise for exploring innovative pathways. As a grand project initiated by China for global economic and trade cooperation, BRI construction spans continents and oceans, covering multiple countries and involving key areas such as energy development and infrastructure construction. It is also influenced by geopolitical factors emanating from the United States and Western countries, and hence faces many unique legal risks.[11]  In the current international landscape, China and BRI participants should achieve the innovative development of the BRI rule of law in the following three dimensions.

Firstly, it is essential to prevent and resolve legal risks in major project cooperation in a timely and effective manner. Unlike traditional international economic and trade cooperation programs, Belt and Road construction focuses more on significant foundational projects involving national economies and their people’s livelihoods. These cooperative projects have not only increased the total trade and investment volume of China and BRI participants but have also brought substantial economic benefits to local communities. While summarizing successful experiences, it is equally important to learn from the failures of individual projects. In today’s world, dominated as it is by geoeconomic and trade relations, cooperation on major projects is bound to face a more complex international environment. Therefore, more attention should be paid to issues such as international financing, labor, local livelihoods, environmental protection, and climate change. These issues have become significant risk points for the innovative development of the BRI, and are common pretexts for the US and other Western countries to discredit the initiative. If these issues are not addressed in a timely and effective manner, they may become the so-called “evidence” used by the West to attack the BRI, thus creating an international atmosphere unfavorable to its high-quality development.

Secondly, there is an urgent need to substantially improve the facilitation and rule of law of international trade and investment. Currently, the domestic level of trade and investment facilitation and rule of law in participating countries do not meet requirements for the high-quality development of the BRI, and the risks and costs of outdated regulations are continuously increasing. The level of rule of law in the participating countries varies greatly; many countries’ economic and trade legislation remains at a relatively low level, leading to inefficiencies in customs clearance for import and export goods, high transportation costs, and increasingly serious tariff and non-tariff barriers, significantly reducing economic benefits in practice. Studies have shown that in recent years, tariffs and non-tariff barriers in some participating countries have not decreased with the expansion of international trade under the initiative, but rather have tended to grow. Some Central Asian countries that are significant BRI participants have very low efficiency in terms of customs clearance of goods and have not been able to improve it in a timely and effective manner, severely restricting the growth of import and export trade volume between these countries and China. It is estimated that if these countries could effectively address delays in customs clearance, they could gain incremental export earnings ranging from 1.8 percent (compared to Eastern European countries) to 4.8 percent (compared to South Asian countries).[12]   Furthermore, in the field of international investment legislation, the existing foreign investment legal systems of some participating countries are strongly protectionist and contain numerous restrictive provisions relating to foreign capital. Many sectors have not been effectively opened to foreign investment, and the level of protection for foreign investment is below internationally recognized minimum standards. Foreign investors face difficulties in seeking legal remedies when their legitimate rights and interests are infringed upon, which seriously affects investor confidence.[13]

Lastly, the content of the BRI rule of law system needs to be enriched and improved. Through more than a decade of unrelenting effort, the construction of the BRI rule of law system has achieved great success, but there are still some structural shortcomings. 1) There are great differences in the international economic and trade rules applicable to BRI participants. The emergence of numerous regional economic and trade agreements has exacerbated the fragmentation of BRI-related international rules, and the necessary coordination mechanisms applicable for China and BRI participants are lacking.[14]  2) The standards of BRI-related rules need to be upgraded. The standards of the economic and trade agreements signed between BRI participants are significantly lower than those involving developed economies, and some are even lower than the agreements between these countries and non-BRI countries. 3) In terms of connectivity, there is a noticeable lack of unified norms and common standards among BRI participants, leading to considerable obstacles in areas such as personnel movement, technology transfer, and product application. 4) In terms of dispute resolution mechanisms, there is a lack of unified and coordinated international mechanisms for commercial dispute resolution and international investment disputes, with the result that some commercial and investment disputes have not been resolved in a timely and effective manner. China and BRI participants do not have unified commercial and procedural rules, and the system of mutual legal assistance treaties and agreements is still underdeveloped. Some countries have relatively outdated understandings and judicial concepts regarding commercial arbitration that significantly affect the transnational enforceability of commercial arbitration awards. There are currently numerous forms of international dispute resolution mechanisms involving China and BRI participants. Some rely on the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) for international investment arbitration; others use expert panel reviews or ad hoc investment arbitration as agreed upon in bilateral trade and investment agreements; and yet others include the establishment of investment courts in regional economic and trade agreements. The attitudes of BRI participants towards international investment dispute adjudication vary greatly, and one cannot be optimistic about the effectiveness of enforcing international investment arbitration awards, resulting in poor protection of investors’ interests.

China and BRI participants should confront the adverse impact of geoeconomic and trade relations, maintain confidence in the BRI rule of law, focus on the three dimensions of the innovative pathway for the BRI rule of law, strengthen the platform for legal cooperation, and jointly discuss the best pathway for the innovative development of the rule of law in the new situation. To achieve these goals, China and BRI participants should jointly implement the following proposals concerning the rule of law.

The first is the establishment of the principles of transparency and sustainable development and creation of the relevant legal mechanisms. These two fundamental legal principles are crucial for preventing legal risks in major cooperation projects under the BRI and are the basic guarantees for their successful resolution. The principle of transparency is a fundamental legal principle of the WTO multilateral trade system, and since China and most BRI participants are WTO members, they should adhere to this principle. Various legal issues arising from BRI construction, such as debt problems and labor and environmental issues, need to be addressed in an open and transparent manner. False narratives, such as the “debt trap” and “labor and environmental trap,” need to be clarified by increasing the transparency of BRI projects. Furthermore, integrity is a core element of the BRI rule of law,[15]  and implementing the principle of transparency significantly assists in reducing the occurrence of cross-border crimes such as corruption and money laundering. Therefore, we recommend that China and BRI participants include transparency provisions in BRI cooperation documents, collaborate on establishing an open system and legal mechanism for BRI projects, formulate unified procedures and standards for information disclosure together with relevant exception clauses, and set up a public information platform accessible to the public and international society. At the same time, complaint mechanisms and dispute resolution mechanisms should be established to address disputes arising from the project disclosure process.

The principle of sustainable development, established by the United Nations as a fundamental principle of international law, has become a basic legal principle in the international economic and trade legal system. The core objective of the BRI is to promote economic development and improve the livelihood of BRI participants, which is in line with the principle of sustainable development. Establishing the principle of sustainable development is inherent in the BRI rule of law. In this regard, the Chinese government has released the Belt and Road Cooperation Plan on Ecological and Environmental Protection, which provides guidance for collaborative efforts to achieve sustainable development goals. To effectively implement this cooperation plan and action agenda, China and BRI participants should include ecological and environmental protection clauses and rules in the BRI cooperation documents, and ensure that all BRI participants’ enterprises comply with these clauses and rules. Human rights protection is another important requirement of the sustainable development principle. The BRI aims to create people-to-people bonds, and the timely resolution of local livelihood issues, including labor issues, is a basic prerequisite for such bonds. Therefore, we recommend that China and BRI participants jointly establish a societal and livelihood risk analysis system for major projects, strictly implement risk assessment throughout the entire project cycle, and set up a special working mechanism and information reporting system to address social and livelihood issues related to the projects in a timely and effective manner. At an appropriate time in the future, China and BRI participants could jointly formulate labor clauses in economic and trade agreements. While drawing on relevant content from high-standard international agreements such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), full consideration should be given to the characteristics of the realities of the BRI, the degree of acceptance of participating countries, etc., reflecting the unique features of the BRI rule of law system.

Secondly, we need to promote the in-depth development of international economic and trade legal cooperation along the BRI and significantly enhance its level of facilitation and rule of law in terms of trade and investment. This is an important measure for addressing the shortcomings in legal infrastructure that affect high-quality BRI development and for releasing greater institutional dividends. The Chinese government could establish a special assistance fund that leverages international organizations or mechanisms such as the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), the BRICS Cooperation Mechanism, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), to promote the modernization of legislation in BRI participating countries in the field of international trade and investment; this measure will help these countries quickly improve their domestic trade and investment rules. China should share its successful legislative experience with BRI participants and send well-known domestic legal professionals with expertise in international trade and investment to these countries to conduct training and exchange programs. Additionally, China should respond to the requests of the relevant countries for assistance in formulating laws and regulations in the field of international trade and investment in an appropriate manner.

In the field of international trade, China and BRI participants should take more concrete actions to improve the transparency and accessibility of trade policy. To this end, it is necessary to strengthen the construction of trade information platforms and windows and to promote the establishment of a single trade information window among those countries or regions capable of doing so. Additionally, all parties should jointly explore new border management methods and attempt to establish a border management information-sharing mechanism based on risk management. Moreover, platforms should be utilized to open communication channels between those departments managing non-tariff measures and to promote mutual recognition of product conformity assessment results by inspection and quarantine departments. An efficient cross-border transportation management system should also be established to provide maximum convenience for the cross-border movement of imported and exported products. To better achieve the goal of trade facilitation, China and BRI participants should establish a trade facilitation assessment and cooperation mechanism to promptly identify and resolve institutional barriers to trade facilitation in areas such as cargo transportation, customs clearance, personnel exchanges, and information flow. In the field of international investment, China and BRI participants should adopt the national treatment principle and the negative list system for international investment as basic principles and systems for foreign investment legislation, so as to significantly enhance domestic legislative standards. China can initiate the establishment of a legal forum on international investment cooperation under the BRI and conduct regular exchanges and discussions with BRI participants on experiences in international investment legislation and related issues. This forum will contribute to the incorporation of the principles of national treatment and the negative list system into the framework of foreign investment laws, ensuring equal protection of the legitimate rights and interests of foreign investors and maximizing open markets in the participating countries. Furthermore, action should be taken to regulate the expropriation and requisition of foreign-invested enterprises and their assets; limit unreasonable government intervention; and provide adequate, timely, and reasonable compensation to foreign investors when expropriation and requisition are necessary. Legislation should also ensure the free flow of foreign capital and the smooth recovery of investment returns, allowing free entry and exit. China should also advocate the establishment of a risk assessment mechanism for

international investment under the BRI. This would provide reliable data and information for preventing international investment risks and resolving investment disputes, ensuring the timely resolution of disputes arising from the joint construction of the BRI.[16]

Thirdly, we should establish a network of international BRI economic and trade agreements to address the issue of fragmentation of rules and enrich the rule of law system. Research indicates that China and the BRI participants have made slow progress in concluding international economic and trade agreements, and have yet to form an international BRI economic and trade agreement system. This is a major issue that the innovative development of the BRI rule of law should address. China should take substantive steps to vigorously promote the renewal of trade and investment agreements with BRI participants, focusing on tariff concessions, elimination of non-tariff barriers, international investment protection, and the design of trade facilitation and investment facilitation clauses. China should increase its efforts to negotiate regional economic and trade agreements in key regions along the BRI and should jointly establish the framework and legal mechanisms for free trade zones with countries in these regions. In particular, there is a need to accelerate the conclusion of high-level free trade agreements with the African Continental Free Trade Area and with countries in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Latin America. This will help to comprehensively improve the level of coordination and standardization of economic and trade rules under the BRI framework and promote more efficient economic cooperation and connectivity among BRI participants.

Standard connectivity is one of the core tasks of the BRI rule of law, and establishing such connectivity channels has become an urgent priority for promoting the high-quality development of the BRI. The Chinese government issued a 2018-2020 Action Plan on Belt and Road Standard Connectivity in 2017, and launched Implementation Opinions on Industrial Communications Standardization to Serve the Construction of the Belt and Road Development in 2018. These documents provide a scientific and reasonable implementation plan for achieving the goal of standard connectivity for the BRI. However, practice has shown that the implementation of the above action plans and cooperation tasks has not been very effective. Moving forward, China and BRI participants should work together to put these action plans and cooperation tasks into practice. China should promote active cooperation with BRI participants’ trade associations and standardization bodies to build a platform for sharing information services. All parties should jointly study and formulate standardization policies, provide unified technical standard guidelines for BRI participants’ enterprises, and offer timely information services on product standard certification, WTO/TBT (Technical

Barriers to Trade) notification and consultation, and early warning with regard to product standards. These efforts will create favorable conditions for the future establishment of the BRI technical standard system.

The construction of mechanisms for the settlement of international commercial and investment disputes is a key element of the BRI rule of law, and is of great significance for creating a stable and predictable business environment.[17]  China should work with BRI participants to strengthen cooperation among judicial and arbitration institutions and legal service bodies involved in the settlement of BRI international commercial disputes on the basis of relevant international conventions. China’s international commercial courts should engage in more professional exchanges and cooperation with the international commercial courts of BRI participants (e.g. the Singapore International Commercial Court, the Dubai International Financial Centre Courts, the Kazakhstan International Commercial Court, etc.)

and international commercial judges in the highest judicial bodies of each country. This collaboration will provide fair, efficient, and cost-effective commercial dispute resolution mechanisms for commercial entities involved in the BRI, effectively enhancing the international mobility and transnational enforceability of civil and commercial judgments, arbitration awards, and settlement agreements related to the BRI. China and BRI participants should sign or update bilateral agreements on judicial assistance in civil and commercial matters in a timely manner and explore the feasibility of establishing a joint mechanism for international commercial dispute resolution under the BRI at an appropriate future time.[18]  Additionally, China should strengthen cooperation with BRI participants in reforming the international investment arbitration mechanism. This includes coordinating positions in key reform areas such as the recruitment of international arbitrators, transparency of arbitration awards, precedence systems, consistency in treaty interpretation, and the establishment of arbitration appeal review systems. Joint reform proposals should be presented in a timely fashion to break the long-standing monopoly of the West in the field of international investment arbitration. While effectively utilizing existing international investment dispute settlement mechanisms and related agreement mechanisms, China and BRI participants should also explore the establishment of a unified mechanism for resolving international investment disputes in the future.

In short, in the face of the new challenges posed by geoeconomic and trade relations, the BRI rule of law needs to open up new pathways for innovative development to ensure the achievement of high-quality BRI development goals. It is essential to establish the principles of transparency and sustainable development, substantially promote international economic and trade legal cooperation between China and BRI participants, and create a network of economic and trade agreements along the BRI. These three tasks should be the top priorities in constructing an innovative rule of law pathway for the BRI. The innovative development of the rule of law for the BRI is not only crucial for the steady and long-term progress of the initiative but also has a leading role in addressing the international rule of law crisis that the world faces today. The international community has every reason to believe that, through the joint efforts of China and BRI participants, the practice of innovative development of the BRI rule of law will undoubtedly become a classic example of good law and governance in the global economic and trade field, providing international impetus for the global economic governance system to move in a more just and reasonable direction.

In 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping declared the launch of the Belt and Road Initiative, a grand project for 21st century global development. Over the past decade, the achievements of the BRI have been remarkable. The rule of law is the fundamental premise for the success of the BRI and a necessary guarantee for its high-quality development. Currently, the emergence of geoeconomic and trade relations has had a significant adverse impact on the BRI rule of law. In this context, extra attention should be paid to the unique legal risks of the BRI rule of law. Innovative development of the rule of law should focus on the progression of key areas and issues in three dimensions: preventing and resolving legal risks in major project cooperation, accelerating facilitation and the rule of law in trade and investment, and perfecting and enriching the BRI rule of law system. China and BRI participants should establish the principles of transparency and sustainable development, take effective measures to promote international economic and trade legal cooperation between China and BRI participants, and jointly create a network of economic and trade rules for the BRI based on the principles of consultation, contribution, and shared benefits. These three major tasks should be the focus for establishing the relevant legal frameworks, legal systems, and platforms for legal cooperation. The innovative development of the rule of law for the BRI is not only crucial for its high- quality development but will also become a classic example of good law and governance in the global economic and trade field. It will provide strong support for transforming the global economic governance system towards greater fairness and reasonableness.

 

Liu Jingdong, PhD, is Professor of International Law at the Institute of International Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) . His research field covers international economic law and international commercial dispute resolution. His representative works include Opening Up and Rule of Law in the International Economics (Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press [China], 2020), “The International Rule of Law Crisis and Its Response in the Evolution of Global Economic and Trade Relations” (China Legal Science, 2023, no. 3), and “The Rule of Law Pathways for the New Model of Global Economic Governance” (Chinese Journal of Law, 2012, no. 4), etc. E-mail: liujingdong@cass.org.cn.

 

Wang Zhe is a PhD Candidate at the School of Law, University of International Business and Economics. E-mail: wangzhe0101@live.com.

 

Casarini, Nicola. “When All Roads Lead to Beijing: Assessing China’s New Silk Road and Its Implications for Europe.” The International Spectator, vol. 51, 2016, no. 4.

Chaisse, Julien and Jamieson Kirkwood. “Chinese Puzzle: Anatomy of the (Invisible) Belt and Road Investment Treaty.” Journal of International Economic Law, vol. 23, 2020, no. 1.

CICC Research Department and CICC Research Institute. A New Decade of Belt and Road–– Macroeconomics, Financial and Industrial Trends. Beijing: CITIC Publishing Group, 2023.

Huang, Huikang. “On the Rule of Law Guarantees for Promoting the High-Quality Development of the Joint Construction of the Belt and Road.” Journal of International Law, 2024, no. 1.

Kher, Priyanka and Trung Thu Tran. “Investment Protection along the Belt and Road.” MIT Global Practice Discussion Paper, no. 12, Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2018.

Liu, Jingdong. “The International Rule of Law Crisis and Its Response in the Evolution of Global Economic and Trade Relations.” China Law Journal, 2023, no. 3.

Roberts, Anthea, Henrique Choer Moraes and Victor Ferguson. “Toward a Geoeconomic Order in International Trade and Investment.” Journal of International Economic Law, vol. 22, 2019, no. 4.

Wang, Guiguo. “Research on the Belt and Road Dispute Settlement System.” China Law Journal, 2017, no. 6.

Wang, Heng. “Selective Engagement? Future Path for US-China Economic Relations and Its Implications.” Journal of World Trade, vol. 55, 2021, no. 2.

Wang, Linggui. “The Connotation and Construction Path of the Rule of Law Belt and Road.” International Law Studies, 2022, no. 1.

World Bank Group. Belt and Road Economics–Opportunities and Risks for Transport Corridors. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2019.

Xi,Jinping. On Adhering to the Comprehensive Rule of Law. Beijing: Central Literature Press, 2020.

Xu, Guojian. “Establishing an International Legal System for the Global Circulation of Court

Judgments—Legislative Information, Views and Commentary on the Draft Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments.” Wuhan University International Law Review, 2017, no. 5.

Zhang, Naigen. “Reconstruction of International Economic and Trade Rules under the Belt and Road Initiative.” Jurisprudence, 2016, no. 5.

Zou, Lei. “The Impact of US-European Coordination of Global Infrastructure Programs on the Belt and Road Initiative and China’s Response.” International Economic Review, 2023, no. 3.

—Edited by Li Shumin and Yang Qiong Polished by Sally Borthwick

 

[1]Xi Jinping, On Adhering to the Comprehensive Rule of Law, p. 268.

[2]Wang Linggui, “The Connotation and Construction Path of the Rule of Law for the Belt and Road.”

[3]CICC Research Department and CICC Research Institute, A New Decade of the Belt and Road, pp. 155-158.

[4]Anthea Roberts, Henrique Choer Moraes and Victor Ferguson, “Toward a Geoeconomic Order in International Trade and Investment.”

[5]Huang Huikang, “On Rule of Law Guarantees for Promoting the High-Quality Development of the Joint Construction of the Belt and Road.”

[6]Heng Wang, “Selective Engagement? Future Path for US-China Economic Relations and Its Implications.”

[7]Liu Jingdong, “The International Rule of Law Crisis and Its Response in the Evolution of Global Economic and Trade Relations.”

[8]Anthea Roberts, Henrique Choer Moraes and Victor Ferguson, “Toward a Geoeconomic Order in International Trade and Investment.”

[9]CICC Research Department and CICC Research Institute,A New Decade of Belt and Road, pp. 204- 205.

[10]In recent years, the US and Europe have successively proposed global infrastructure plans such as Build Back Better World (B3W), Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII) and Global Gateway, in an attempt to replace China’s Belt and Road Initiative and engage in geoeconomic confrontation with China. See Zou Lei, “The Impact of US-European Coordination of Global Infrastructure Programs on the Belt and Road Initiative and China’s Response.”

[11]Nicola Casarini, “When All Roads Lead to Beijing: Assessing China’s New  Silk Road and Its Implications for Europe.”

[12]World Bank Group, Belt and Road Economics––Opportunities and Risks for Transport Corridors.

[13]A prominent issue in the investment laws of many participating countries is the low level of transparency and inadequate protection for foreign investment, a situation that has led to numerous international investment disputes in recent years. See Priyanka Kher and Trang Thu Tran, “Investment Protection along the Belt and Road.”

[14]Zhang Naigen, “Reconstruction of International Economic and Trade Rules under the Belt and Road Initiative.”

[15]Huang Huikang, “On the Rule of Law Guarantees for Promoting the High-Quality Development of the Joint Construction of the Belt and Road.”

[16]Julien Chaisse and Jamieson Kirkwood, “Chinese Puzzle: Anatomy of the (Invisible) Belt and Road Investment Treaty.”

[17]Wang Guiguo, “Research on the Belt and Road Dispute Settlement System.”

[18]In October 2015, the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements officially came into effect, and in July 2019, the 22nd Diplomatic Session of the Hague Conference on Private International Law adopted the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters and opened it for signature by all countries. These two international conventions provide new legal bases in international law for the cross-border enforcement of civil and commercial judgments. See Xu Guojian, “Establishing an International Legal System for the Global Circulation of Court Judgments––Legislative Information, Views and Commentary on the Draft Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments.”