David returned from China last week and has posted this reflection of his trip. For the other related entries, click here.

Perhaps the most significant takeaway for me on this trip was being so impressed with the introduction of clinical legal education into Chinese law schools.  On the whole, the clinical professors were the most impressive people I met.  They had enthusiasm for their work and a passion for the students.  Each time they spoke to the students, I could observe their leadership and feel the mutual respect between the students and professors.

Clinical legal education is relatively new to China, having been started less than 10 years ago by Titi Liu, a former program officer at the Ford Foundation.  In just a few years, clinics have become among the most popular courses that students take.  In Xian, for example, there are dozens of law student applicants for each clinical opening.  Professor Wang, who oversees the clinic, designed a system whereby the students make arguments in front of other students as to why they should be in the clinic, and the students vote.  It was fascinating to hear about the democratic process these students followed, and how their arguments revolved around fairness.  For example, in one competition, the students said that it was unfair that one of the applicants had spoken to a prior clinical student.  Nothing in the rules prevented this, but some of the students felt that this applicant had an unfair advantage.  Others thought it reflected his creativity and that it was smart to use others’ experiences to enhance his application.

It is the clinical experience that will form the basis for the Chinese postgraduate fellowship program.  China does not have anything comparable to the summer internship program we offer in the U.S., so the only prior public interest experience is likely to be the clinic.  In my mind, the clinical professors are going to be in the best position to pick those students who would be the strongest fellowship candidates.  Some program administrators want to create an apprentice period to test a few candidates’ skills before making a selection.

Assuming a starting class of 25, they expect to place approximately 10 fellows in programs in Beijing and 15 in other parts of the country.  As things turned out, the administrators decided on a two-track system – one for Beijing and one for the rest of the country.  In Beijing, the host organizations will likely have more say over the students who would become fellows.  In the rest of China, however, there will be a different selection process.  The details have not yet been released, but the Ford Foundation is moving on a fast track to launch his program in the fall.  In the end, the fellowship administrators settled on a tentative name for the program: Public Interest Service Volunteers.

Finally, I thought it might be of interest to share a couple of stories of public interest work being done in China.  One organization we visited in Wuhan, The Center for Protection of Rights of Disadvantaged Citizens, began as an organization offering legal services to a wide range of low-income or disadvantaged clients.  Over time, however, they have begun to take fewer cases and to pick their cases based on strategic impact.  A case that illustrates this approach is one involving police officers who were charging fees for citizens seeking to obtain a motorcycle permit.  There was nothing in the law that allowed these charges, yet it was common practice.  There are many laws that are not known to the general public and there is little transparency in China, so it was difficult to determine if the police conduct was allowed or not.  The Center brought a case demanding that the police explain the authority to charge the fee.  Ultimately, the police could not produce that authority, and the fees were overturned.  More importantly, this case was widely publicized in the newspapers in China and it had a ripple effect and changed the behavior of many government actors who were acting in a similar way without authority.  In addition, the case has been a significant leverage point for increasing government transparency.

What was most striking to me, however, was that after the director told that story, I asked for an example of a case that is on the horizon that might have a similar impact. They did not have a case in mind.  It seemed like it was an isolated example that they stumbled into rather than a deliberate strategy.

Another NGO, the Center for Women’s Law Study and Legal Service of Northwestern Polytechnic University, works on gender discrimination.  The director recently met with Hillary Clinton on her first visit to China as Secretary of State.  The director described a wide range of sex discrimination in China, including sexual harassment of women in the workplace.  But the organization has stopped their work in order to reflect on their past accomplishments and to think about the future.  The issue most on their mind is a law that requires a woman to follow her spouse if he gets a new job.  It used to be that the government would ensure that if a man took a new job or was transferred to another job, the wife would also be guaranteed employment.  Recently, however, that law has changed and the wife must follow the husband but she is not guaranteed employment.  This is the issue that is most pressing, although they don’t yet have a strategy to fix the problem.

Despite the shortcomings, there is so much progress happening in China – it is inspiring. I look forward to working more with my colleagues as the public interest program in China comes to fruition. This eye-opening visit to China is one that I’ll never forget.

-David