The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) prosecuted Japanese military servicemen for war crimes committed during and after the Sino-Japanese War. This paper examines written confessions left by those Japanese war crimes suspects and considers to what extent they were used by the CCP to prosecute sexual violence during the trials. The historical analysis is contextualized by an examination of the representation of the CCP's legal approach to sexual violence in articles from the People's Daily. This paper finds that although accounts of sexual violence are found in the confessions written by suspected Japanese war criminals, the courts did not make rape a focal point of the prosecutions and did not pursue the so-called “comfort women” issue. Furthermore, no victim of rape was called to testify before the court. The CCP's approach to the issue of sexual violence in the 1956 trials closely corresponded to the discourse and propaganda in the People's Daily.

How do state authorities cope with popular contention under authoritarian legality? Based on ethnographic fieldwork and legal repression cases in China, this article highlights that conflicting rules and signals regarding contention management can impose considerable pressure on governments and motivate them to respond cautiously, even though the prevailing rhetoric of law-based governance provides a convenient basis on which authorities can legitimize their coercive actions. This study further theorizes a discreet pattern of government reaction under authoritarian legality – progressive legal repression – that rests on bureaucratic processing to overcome political uncertainty and lower potential risks before formally employing criminal sanctions to achieve domination. Instead of directly using criminal penalties to deter unruly protesters and potential dissenters, the preferred state action is to induce them to engage in available legal-bureaucratic procedures. By reconceptualizing protesters’ claims and behaviour as unreasonable and signalling fulfilment of responsibilities, bureaucratic practices help officials to reduce the risks of damaging their political image and receiving disciplinary action, encouraging them to deploy legal repression. This study reveals more complicated dynamics of state repression under authoritarian legality and emphasizes the important effects of procedural practices on governmental responses and the regime's stability.

We thank Anning Hu for carefully reading and commenting on our report “College is a rich, Han, urban, male club: research notes from a census survey of four tier one colleges in China.” We also thank the editor of The China Quarterly for giving us the chance to respond to the commentary. The topic of assessing disparities in college access in China (and other developing countries undergoing major transitions in their higher education systems) is an important one. We hope that our China Quarterly article, Hu's commentary and our response will stimulate more research and dialogue on this topic in China and elsewhere.

This essay is an attempt to recreate the events of 1955–57–the “high tide” of co-operativization – in a single province of China (Jiangsu). Whereas the other articles in this Special Issue of The China Quarterly view the same events with the benefits of hindsight, as provided by documentary materials and other evidence that have become available since the end of the Mao Era, the account given here is based on contemporary reports – above all, provincial press reports. The intention is thereby not only to give a flavour of the extraordinary atmosphere that surrounded one province's response to Mao's 31 July 1955 speech, but also to convey the tensions and policy dilemmas that emerged during the second half of the year and into 1956. Even allowing for the bias of official media reports, the evidence and analysis presented here vividly highlight the complex factors – economic and social – bearing on policy making and policy implementation during 1955–56.

Public interest in China, as reflected in the level of media attention, is burgeoning in the West and elsewhere in the world. This interest is driven by China's increasing presence and importance in the lives of people around the world; and for the same reason is likely to continue growing. Since media discourses are the main way in which Western publics receive information about China, contributing to media reports and helping journalists reach deeper understandings is an important task and opportunity for academics whose specialist knowledge of China is often more nuanced than that of generalist China correspondents. Although developments in the two professions are demanding closer and more frequent interactions, many scholars are reluctant to engage. This is partly due to structural disincentives within the academy, and partly due to obstacles in the scholar–media relationship. Focusing on the latter, the objective of this article is to illuminate how China scholars and journalists currently interact, and to identify means to increasing their efficiency and sustainability.

The simple definition of “lexicon” in the Concise Oxford English Dictionary is “dictionary.” Unlike a dictionary, though, the words in this work cannot be consulted through an alphabetical index, the only access being afforded by the chapter headings and subheadings of the three-page Contents list at the front. It does not pretend to be nor is it a dictionary, it is a systematic attempt to classify and in part to explain the typology and functions of the word stock of Chinese. The Index is a guide to the descriptors rather than to the material described.

This volume, first published two years ago in Germany, is a welcome addition to the growing number of English language studies on entrepreneurship and private sector development in Vietnam and China. But, whereas other work aims to account for the operation, financing and development of this sector, Heberer's work has a narrower, if no less ambitious mission: to demonstrate that entrepreneurs are on the way “to replace the state as an agency of development and modernization” (p. 1).

For Heberer, this process is an amalgam of various and often contradictory forces that find private entrepreneurs, intentionally or otherwise, driving substantive social and political change. For this reason, Heberer rejects a number of alternative labels that might be used to describe these actors, such as “class,” “interest group,” and “strata.” Instead, he argues that they are best regarded as a “strategic group,” a phrase meant to indicate the power of entrepreneurs not only as collective self-interested actors, but also as symbols of new values and beliefs (p. 69 and p. 341).

This is a completely revised and updated version of the work of the same name published by Mackerras a decade ago. Similar in structure to the earlier work, save that the original's chapter on society and culture has been omitted, it attempts and generally succeeds in bringing the reader abreast of the many developments that have occurred in China during the intervening decade.