The Relationship Between Law And Government During The Period Nanking National Government

A fire in late 1922 destroyed many houses in the Xunlimen in Hankou.Part of the foundation of Xunlifang was involved in a real estate dispute between Hubei Official Money Bureau and Qinhuai Yaowang Temple.After three trials,the Supreme Court sent the case back to Hubei High Court for retrial.The High Court had not finished the trial yet.Due to the change of political power,Hubei Official Money Bureau had been cancelled.Hubei Public Property Agency inherited the property of Hubei Official Money Bureau.The High Court ultimately ruled in favor of Yaowang Temple.But the Hubei Public Property Agency did not agree that this real estate dispute by the court jurisdiction,and refused to execute the judgement.When the two sides were at loggerheads,the Supervision Institute intervened and referred the dispute to Council of League and Court of Judiciary for consultation.They agreed to be under the jurisdiction and ordered the Hubei public property organs to perform their duties.The reason for the non-execution was given by the public property organs in Hubei,and the practice of the Supervision Institute was questioned,thus forming a stalemate.Since the outbreak of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression,This dispute was put on hold.The Hankou Works Bureau and the Public Security Bureau,which were involved in real estate disputes,expressed different attitudes toward the court judgment than the public property organs,and their official duties were based on court decisions.After the victory of the Anti-Japanese War,Yaowang Temple and the Hubei Public Property Agency renewed disputes on the same foundation.When the two sides went to court again,the Yaowang Temple proposed reconciliation.Due to the interest,the real estate dispute was finally resolved.The reason why the public property organs dare to oppose the central government’s orders is because of the support of the Hubei provincial government.The local government’s order against the central government has prevented the court’s decision from being enforced and the judicial authority has not been maintained.Although judicial independence is advocated,the enforcement of court decisions is influenced by the contrast of administrative power,so the judiciary is not independent.However,careful scrutiny,the public sector authorities questioned the practice of the Supervisory Institute is not entirely unreasonable,the results of the negotiations between the Court of Judiciary and the Council of League actually do not have the final effect.This embarrassing situation was caused by the imperfect system design at the time.Mr.Sun Yat-sen designed the five-power constitution,aiming at making checks and balances between the five organs,and dividing the work and cooperation.The end result is that there are no checks and balances between the five organs,only division of labor.The questioning of the public property organs reflects to some extent the imperfection of Mr.Sun Yat-sen’s five-power constitution.This imperfect institutional design may be the root cause of this dispute that cannot be resolved for a long time.