International Human Rights Obligations In traditional Chinese thinking, the image of the country as the ‘Middle Kingdom’ contributed to a rejection of the idea of treaty-relationships on the basis of an equal legal status of states.9 China’s concept of sovereignty has influenced its approach to international treaty obligations. Although China claims that the provisions in human rights treaties, to which it is a State Party, are part of domestic Chinese law, in practice there is no way to directly implement international law in Chinese courts. The relationship between international treaties and domestic law is not defined in the Constitution or the Legislation Law. China is a State Party to a number of international human rights treaties. Most relevant to the death penalty is its ratification of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). The country has also signed, but not ratified, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). A long-standing criticism of China’s implementation of CAT, by UN experts, is the absence of any definition of torture in Chinese law, which conforms to article 1 of the Treaty. China’s human rights record is reviewed at the United Nations as part of the process of Universal Periodic Review (UPR). At the last UPR of China, in 2018, a significant number of countries urged China to work towards abolition of the death penalty through measures including the introduction of a moratorium and reducing the number of crimes punishable by the death penalty. Countries also called for transparency in the use of the death penalty, adequate legal representation and the right to a fair trial. 9 Ahl, Björn. ‘Exploring Ways of Implementing International Human Rights Treaties in China.’ Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 28(3):361-403. September 2010. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2830404 10