State Regulation and the Emergence of Self-Regulation in the Chinese and Vietnamese Nonprofit and Philanthropic Sectors

Regulation as Political Control: China’s First Charity Law and Its Implications for Civil Society

“…In the Chinese party-state’s eyes, the political implications of civil society development have long been paramount. Beijing generally pursues a “policy of encouraging nonprofit and philanthropic activity that the government favors (particularly in service provision), while serving to discourage, control, and constrain nonprofit activity that the government does not want to see occur” (Sidel, 2016, p. 94). Since roughly 2005, the fear of “color revolutions” that motivated Putin’s clampdown on NGOs in Russia has also been a driver of state policy on both domestic and INGOs in China (Wilson, 2009).…”

Riding the Regulatory Wave: Reflections on Recent Explorations of the Statutory and Nonstatutory Nonprofit Regulatory Cycles in 16 Jurisdictions

“… Note. NGO = nongovernmental organization; DENIVA = Development Network of Indigenous Voluntary Associations. a The Australian Council for International Development (ACFID) Code of Conduct; see McGregor-Lowndes (2017 p. 190). b Article 35 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China provides that “Citizens of the People’s Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration.” Article 51 provides, “Citizens of the People’s Republic of China, in exercising their freedoms and rights, may not infringe upon the interests of the state, of society or of the collective, or upon the lawful freedoms and rights of other citizens.” c Chinese Private Law Forum, Declaration of Chinese Private Foundations on Self-Regulation (2001); see Sidel (2017, p. 98). d Articles 96 and 97 of the 2008 Constitution recognize nonprofit organizations as a means of expression to strengthen citizenship; see Appe and Marchesini da Costa (2017, p. 164). e Aid Management and Accountability Program consultative process on the establishment of an NGO Apex Body. f Vietnam’s 1992 Constitution provides for NGOs by guaranteeing citizens’ rights to become involved in organizations that benefit society and recognizes international organizations. g According to Sidel (2010, p. 55), “In late 2005 and early 2006, this debate reached a point previously unknown in modern Vietnamese legislative history, when a team of specialists convened and supported by the Vietnamese Union of Science and Technology Associations (VUSTA) wrote their own alternative draft Law on Associations in response to the difficulty in forcing changes in the official draft. This appears to have been the first time in modern Vietnamese history that opposition to a government-drafted law had reached a level that a “rebellious” alternative law was formally drafted and made available for discussion.” i Research Center for Management and Sustainable Development, Code of Practice on Transparency and Accountability for Civil Society Organizations in Vietnam.…”

“…This appears to have been the first time in modern Vietnamese history that opposition to a government-drafted law had reached a level that a “rebellious” alternative law was formally drafted and made available for discussion.” i Research Center for Management and Sustainable Development, Code of Practice on Transparency and Accountability for Civil Society Organizations in Vietnam. See Sidel (2017, p. 105). …”

“… c Chinese Private Law Forum, Declaration of Chinese Private Foundations on Self-Regulation (2001); see Sidel (2017, p. 98). …”

“… i Research Center for Management and Sustainable Development, Code of Practice on Transparency and Accountability for Civil Society Organizations in Vietnam. See Sidel (2017, p. 105). …”