Alford Tribute

Martha Minow
300^th Anniversary University Professor, Harvard University

A Scholar and Administrator Attuned: Saluting William Alford

The English verb “attune” means “to bring into harmony” or “to make aware or responsive.”  These may not be qualities typically associated with a lawyer, legal scholar, or university administrator, yet they are exemplified by the work of William (Bill) Alford across his career thus far. Notably, in his seventeen years leading Harvard Law School’s Graduate Program and International Legal Studies Program, and even longer service as Director of East Asian Legal Studies at Harvard, Bill has infused these initiatives with kindness, generosity, intellectual rigor, and his distinctive ability to weave meaningful connections across diverse nations and communities.

All of these qualities are further illustrated by his work as the founding Chair of the Harvard Law School Project on Disability which provides pro bono services on issues of disability in many nations, including China, Bangladesh, the Philippines, and Vietnam. Implementing the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in nations that do not embrace a framework of individual rights could create genuine difficulties. Yet, illustrating attunement to cultural differences, Bill and his colleague Michael Stein effectively work to enable individuals and groups and especially persons with disabilities and their representative organizations to undertake informed human rights advocacy. This example surfaces three elements that continually inform Bill’s work: 1) insight from comparative study; 2) deep engagement with people; and 3) humility and judgment.

I. Insights from Comparative Studies

Bill is of course one of the world’s leading experts on Chinese law and legal history. Just as his scholarship draws insights through comparative work, his academic leadership reflects curiosity, respect, and analysis revolving around contrasting cultures and national traditions. In a lecture he delivered at Harvard upon his appointment as the inaugural Jerome A. and Joan L. Cohen Professor of East Asian Legal Studies at Harvard Law School, Bill described comparative legal studies and another kind of comparison: learning from the past to understand the present.[1]

His classic contribution in To Steal a Book is an Elegant Offense: Intellectual Property Law in Chinese Civilization moves from the initial recognition of a clash in international trade law between Western and Chinese conceptions of intellectual property law.[2] The book’s immersion in historical, cultural, economic, and political traditions identifies different world views around property ownership, profit as a motive, as well as contrasting perspectives on cultural and political pride and power. Finding comparisons within comparisons, the book also affords lessons from internal political developments toward Western-style intellectual property law in Taiwan that contrast with less successful external pressures for China to move in that direction.

In Raising the Bar: The Emerging Legal Profession in East Asia (Harvard East Asian Legal Studies 2007), Bill and his fellow editors and contributors trace dramatic growth in legal professional work in China, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, and Indonesia.[3] By considering these varied settings, the work illuminates distinctive relationships between law and state authorities and between law and historically disadvantaged individuals and communities. The essays show nuanced attention to similarities and differences and to contrasts that are not even well-captured by those categories. In these and other scholarly efforts, Bill displays the resistance to ethnocentrism and awareness of the impact of perspective and the opportunities for self-reflection that characterize the promise of comparative studies.[4]   His approach embodies this recognition, well-stated by author Louis L’Amour: “Much of the study of history is a matter of comparison, of relating what was happening in one area to what was happening elsewhere, and what had happened in the past. To view a period in isolation is to miss whatever message it has to offer.”[5]

Bill’s popular classes (Comparative Law: Why Law? Lessons from China; and Comparative Law Workshop) feature immersion in alternative settings and deepening attention to assumptions, often unstated, about points of departure. This approach also guides the many workshops, gatherings, and informal conversations supported by the Graduate Program and International Legal Studies with heightened elements of fun and humor. Attracting the most talented individuals from around the world to advanced legal education, the Graduate Program at Harvard Law School does not only pursue research and leadership through law, it also builds a network—during schooling and beyond—of extraordinary individuals who become leading scholars, lawyers, and political figures around the world. The strength of that network connecting students across generations owes more to Bill than can be fully expressed.

During his time as vice dean, Bill conceived, designed, and constructed rich linkages with universities in other countries. These connections make it possible for hundreds of Harvard students to study and work abroad and for students and faculty from other nations to spend time at Harvard. Expanding the graduate program to regularly bring students from more than seventy nations to study at Harvard, while maintaining its policy of need-blind admission and need-based financial aid, Bill is devoted to creating opportunities and nurturing talented individuals, which has created the largest concentration of sub-Saharan African law students in any school in North America. Year after year, students arriving from nations that had never sent any to Harvard Law School found a welcoming and congenial community of scholars eager to learn from one another with the curiosity and respect exemplified by Bill Alford.

II. Deep Engagement with People

Year after year, Bill engages deeply with individual students, visiting scholars, faculty colleagues, staff, and others. Providing a sounding board, gently probing their ideas, vigorously forging connections and opportunities, and quietly assisting with personal problems, Bill becomes the go-to person in so many people’s lives. He remembers details about people’s families and passions and circles back with more ideas and connections. His devotion to his wonderful family is mirrored in his capacity to make others feel like members of his family.

When I was dean of the Law School, I witnessed these qualities in Bill over and over, notably, including with alumni in gatherings around the world. Walking with Bill down the street in Beijing, in Taipei, in Hong Kong, and in Seoul is like walking with a rock star. Some of the fame comes from his work co-founding the first academic program in the People’s Republic of China on American law and the first national exchange program to bring Chinese students to the United States for legal education; some from the trust he has earned by both the governments of the United States and governments of other nations; as well as frequent requests for advice from multilateral organizations, foundations, civic groups and nongovernmental organizations, law firms and businesses. Bill’s public service work connects him with efforts around human rights, law reform, and the legal profession, and allows him to create deep ties with new colleagues. Bill brings these connections and resources back to Harvard and also models for students, visiting fellows, staff, and colleagues the power of allies and friends.

He is known and admired by so many people. His honorary degrees, distinguished lectureships, and awards are too many to recount. He is humble about all of this and about so much else. The level of respect and affection he has earned goes well beyond recognition of his knowledge and wisdom. It emanates from more profound appreciation for his ability and commitment to connect on a personal, human level.

III. Humility and Judgment

Bill does not carry expectations of being treated as a “rock star.”  Indeed, he tends to dismiss recognition of his own accomplishments and qualities. This humility may well be Bill’s superpower. It lies behind his approach to others, his comparative study, and his openness to learning.

Yet Bill is not lacking in self-respect nor in the ability to make rigorous and vigorous judgments. In assessing scholarship and giving students feedback, Bill may be kind but he highlights problems and makes clear what could and should be better. In reviewing proposed academic initiatives, funding sources, and policies, Bill is stringent in his judgments of quality, integrity, and risks. As a colleague and as a friend, I am so grateful to be able to turn to Bill for his unfaltering good judgment.

Having humility allows for respectful communication and acknowledgment of potential mistakes or misunderstandings even in the course of making judgments. But humility should not entail suspension of judgment or doubt about the ability to judge. As the common saying goes, “Humility is not thinking less of yourself, it’s thinking of yourself less.”

As Bill steps down from his enormous duties as vice dean for the Graduate Program, he will have more time for his vital scholarship and mentoring, his international pro bono and advising work, and for his ongoing leadership of the East Asian Legal Studies Program and the Harvard Law School Project on Disability. How terrific that his many communities will still benefit from his insights from comparisons, his engagement with people, and his powerful combination of humility and judgment.

[hr gap=”20″]

[1] See Learning from the Past to Appreciate the Present, Harv. L. Today (Dec. 19, 2018), https://today.law.harvard.edu/in-learning-from-the-past-to-appreciate-the-present-alford-draws-from-confucius-and-contemporary-china/.

[2] See William P. Alford, To Steal a Book is an Elegant Offense: Intellectual Property Law in Chinese Civilization (1995).

[3] See Harv. E. Asian Legal Stud., Raising the Bar: The Emerging Legal Profession in East Asia (William P. Alford ed., 2007).

[4] See Gunter Frankenberg, Critical Comparisons: Re-Thinking Comparative Law, 26 Harv. Int’l L.J. 411, 439 (1985); see also Vicki C. Jackson, Ambivalent Resistance and Comparative Constitutionalism: Opening up the Conversation on “Proportionality,” Rights and Federalism, 1 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 583 (1999).

[5] Louis L’Amour, Education of a Wandering Man 167 (1990).

Lo Chang-fa*
Taiwan’s Permanent Representative to the World Trade Organization (“WTO”); former Justice of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of China; former Dean of National Taiwan University College of Law

Passion and Compassion Being the Key Characteristics of a Successful Legal Educator: Professor William P. Alford Is Hao Laoshi with Such Characteristics

1. Introduction

The term “老師” (laoshi) used in Taiwan does not only refer to its plain meaning of “teacher”; it is also an honorific title to show respect to a person who serves as a mentor to her students and has guided and inspired them not merely in their skills and academic performance, but also in their proper manners and behaviors toward other people and proper attitudes toward managing various matters (that is, “為人處事” or wei ren chu shi). In some eastern societies, when people discuss education, a “good teacher” or “好老師” (hao laoshi) is always the key component for a successful education at all levels.

In Taiwan, there is still a tradition of giving high respect to hao laoshi not only by the students, but also by the whole society. In order to be considered a hao laoshi, one must be able to meet certain high standards, including being passionate and compassionate enough to engage in authoring writings in order to advance her thoughts about certain fundamental values (that is, “著書立說” or zhu shu li shuo), to teach both by words and by her own example so as to show that she is also practicing the values that she is proposing (that is, “言教身教” or yan jiao shen jiao), to teach without any partiality so that the disadvantaged people also have similar opportunities to receive her guidance (that is, “有教無類” or you jiao wu lei), to teach in accordance with the students’ aptitude so that not only smart students would become better, but also less sophisticated students can progressively improve (that is, “因材施教” or yin cai shi jiao), and to have an extensive sense of social responsibility to care disadvantaged groups or individuals (that is, “社會責任感” or she hui ze ren gan).

The standards of hao laoshi might not be universally agreed upon. However, they are useful standards to help us reflect whether there have been some important elements that need to be incorporated into legal education. These standards are also useful in helping us identify a dedicated hao laoshi in legal education so that we can express our respect and gratitude to her.

Traditionally, legal education emphasizes the improvement of students’ legal skills and abilities, including skills in logical, analytical, and critical thinking, and abilities in presenting an opinion or arguing for a case in a clear and persuasive manner. What is not particularly emphasized in legal education in many (or most) jurisdictions is building the fundamental human values into the mindset of law students and integrating the passion and cares for society and compassion for the disadvantaged people into the nature of law students.

In order to build certain fundamental values into the mentality of law students to enable them to unequivocally distinguish legally and ethically right from wrong, and to ensure that the law students are equipped with necessary passion for the society and compassion for the disadvantaged groups and individuals, we really need hao laoshi in the law schools. We have to expect that law professors also have passion and compassion to engage in legal education by words and by their own examples. The suggestion of having passionate and compassionate law professors to nurture law students with this mindset does not mean that legal skills and abilities are not important. Actually, legal skills and abilities on the one hand, and faithful respect of fundamental values as well as caring the society and the disadvantaged people on the other hand, are two fundamental pillars of a respectable jurist.

If we are to use these benchmarks suggested above to present a perfect example of hao laoshi in the field of legal education, Professor William P. Alford of Harvard Law School is definitely the one who meets all the high standards and deserves the utmost respect and gratitude.

In this Tribute, I will lay out the reasons and some supporting facts to show why Professor Alford is hao laoshi and is really a teacher of teachers.

2. Being Passionate in Authoring Writings in Order to Advance His Thoughts

Here, the meaning of authoring writings to advance one’s thoughts includes not only publication of books and articles, but also initiation of creative academically and socially meaningful programs or proposals. Publications and initiatives need creative thinking and enormous efforts. Both of them can generate similar long-lasting positive impact on legal education.

Professor Alford has very creative writings and programs in many areas of law. His areas of interest include comparative law, Chinese law, legal history, U.S.-Chinese relations, disability law, international trade law, legal profession, transnational and global lawyering, and international legal education, among other fields.[1] Notwithstanding the wide variety of Professor Alford’s fields of interest, they all lead to a common theme, which is the promotion of international aspects of legal training in order to enable law students to address complicated international legal issues involving other countries (especially China and some Asian countries) and to be more aware of disadvantaged people in different jurisdictions.

Professor Alford has many new ideas, several of which have become important programs that he launched. For instance, he brought in the idea of “internationalization” to Harvard Law School’s curriculum and co-curricular activities. He also launched a program to allow students to earn credit when spending a semester in other countries. He also spent so much effort to develop a very innovative matching gift program in support of graduate student financial aid.[2] These are not merely technical changes of curriculum and school policies. They actually have great positive impacts on the evolution and development of the school and its legal education. These innovative programs and initiatives are also support the main theme of encouraging law students to look at things from an international perspective and recruiting more talented international students to join the law school community so that people with different backgrounds can enrich each other in their school time and beyond. Indeed, an atmosphere where people from different countries with diverse cultural backgrounds can comfortably learn together and know each other’s legal systems is of key importance to the mutual enhancement their systems and to making a better world.

Professor Alford’s writings have been published worldwide and are of high importance in relevant fields. The following books are examples showing his great passion in authoring writings and in advancing his thoughts of caring for disadvantaged people: To Steal a Book is an Elegant Offense: Intellectual Property Law in Chinese Civilization; Raising the Bar: The Emerging Legal Profession in East Asia; 残疾人法律保障机制研究 (A Study of Legal Mechanisms to Protect Persons with Disabilities); Prospects for the Professions in China; and Taiwan and International Human Rights: A Story of Transformation.[3]

Professor Alford’s active practice of zhu shu li shuo shows his great passion. And his achievement in this regard is admirable.

3. Being Passionate to Teach by Words and by His Own Example

A hao laoshi does not always need to instruct students about what is right and wrong. Students are competent enough to see what and how their professor is behaving and whether their professor is performing righteousness as she is telling them to do. They compare whether their professor’s words match her day-to-day practice. Many students consider their teacher as a role model. If a professor merely incorporates into her law school curriculum certain fundamental values to unequivocally distinguish legally and ethically right from wrong, such fundamental values might not sink into the mentality of law students. However, if a law professor practices what she is advocating, it is far more persuasive and could have much greater impact on students.

As indicated above, Professor Alford cares about disadvantaged people. He cares very much about the performance and development of human rights protection in many countries. I have the honor to co-edit with Professors Alford and Jerome Cohen the above-mentioned book, Taiwan and International Human Rights: A Story of Transformation. From my personal experience working with Professor Alford, he cares so much about human rights development in Taiwan and was enthusiastic in telling the world the story. He also personally authored a chapter for the book, which is entitled “People Over Pandas: Taiwan’s Engagement of International Human Rights Norms with Respect to Disability” (with Qiongyue Hu and Charles Wharton). This shows his great compassion in caring for disadvantaged people who live on the other side of the globe and in caring about the legal system that protects such vulnerable groups. Another example of showing his genuine interest in caring for disadvantaged people is reflected in Professor Alford’s book, An Oral History of the Special Olympics in China.[4] The volumes include individuals with an intellectual disability telling their life stories. For many people, it is hard to imagine that a Harvard Law Professor would care about people with intellectual disabilities in a distant country. But caring about such disadvantaged people in different corners of the world is an integral to the character of Professor Alford.

Professor Alford is not merely advocating for the enhancement of disadvantaged people. He also initiates and participates in many innovative programs to help people in need. For instance, Professor Alford was co-founder and chair of the very active Harvard Law School Project on Disability (“HPOD”), which works “to enable persons with disabilities to claim their full and equal human rights” and “to develop equitable societies that respect the equal autonomy and dignity of persons with disabilities.”[5] Under the program, there have been many creative pro bono works on disability conducted to improve human rights situations in many jurisdictions (including China, Bangladesh, the Philippines, Vietnam, and several other nations) under HPOD.[6] Also very impressively, he serves as the lead director and vice chair of the Special Olympics’ Board of Directors.[7] Although Professor Alford is humble enough to consider himself being “blessed to have been involved with Special Olympics for the past two decades,”[8] he is actually needed by the organization and is able to make unique contributions with his profound legal background and enthusiasm. It is fortunate for many disadvantaged people to have Professor Alford caring about them and helping them.

Professor Alford teaches us not only by his writings, but also by his own example about being compassionate toward disadvantaged people and being passionate in personally engaging in the protection of such group of people and in the enhancement of their welfare through various innovative ways. He is really practicing yan jiao shen jiao.

4. Being Compassionate to Teach International Students Without Any Partiality and to Teach in Accordance with Students’ Aptitude

At Harvard Law School, there are many foreign LLM students.[9] A large portion of them come from economically and democratically less developed countries. They need special help and support in order to get into Harvard Law School and to afford their stay. As mentioned above, Professor Alford developed the matching gift program to support those students in financial need. The program helps Harvard Law School to admit students “irrespective of financial need and career goals.”[10] In Professor Alford’s words, “That is the right thing to do … as it enables Harvard to enroll the best and most diverse range of graduate students—in terms of geographic and demographic background, life experience, and intellectual and professional aspirations—of any U.S. law school.”[11] This reflects Professor Alford’s personal character of being so compassionate and willing to recruit international students from many disadvantaged regions of Africa and Asia. His students even commented that “[t]here are nations that will never be the same because of his gracious tenacity and commitment to enabling the Graduate Program to support students—rich and poor; from every nation, tribe and creed.”[12] He is actually practicing the noble concept of you jiao wu lei.

Many students from Asia, Africa, and developing countries love to have formal and informal discussions with Professor Alford. Many students love to choose him as their supervisor, based on their understanding that Professor Alford is willing to listen to their thoughts (despite being preliminary and immature when they are expressed) and to give insightful feedback. Engaging in discussion with Professor Alford makes them feel comfortable and is rewarding. Here I quote Professor Ruth Okediji’s words about Professor Alford: “He has an eye for identifying promising young scholars”; he “wasn’t just a teacher; he was also an intellectual refuge. I could raise questions, bounce ideas [and] scrutinize things with him.”[13] Professor Alford’s way of treating and nurturing students is a best practice of yin cai shi jiao.

5. Having an Extensive and Compassionate Sense of Social Responsibility and Responsibility to the Community

Many law professors (but not all) in their jurisdictions have a sense of responsibility that they would devote to help their students become good lawyers and would engage in correcting social injustices. But not many people are able to consistently and continuously sacrifice their valuable time for several decades to help make society and the community better.

If we look at Professor Alford’s previous achievements, we can easily identify the enormous passion and compassion in taking up the responsibility for the matters he was proposing or handling. As mentioned above, Professor Alford currently initiates and engages in many programs to help disadvantaged people in different countries. This is a manifestation of his compassionate sense of social responsibility.

In addition, he served as vice dean for the Graduate Program and International Legal Studies at Harvard Law School for eighteen years. One might not be able to imagine that a brilliant law professor who has so many opportunities to expand his personal connections and to enhance his own academic reputation would want to spend such an extended period of time endlessly supporting the school and perpetually helping international students. He really has a very strong sense of responsibility to the school as a smaller community and to the larger community at the global level.

6. Concluding Remarks

It is difficult to use such few words to describe a person who has contributed to legal education for a long time. But if one has to choose, “passion” and “compassion” are the words for such purpose. These are perfect words to describe Professor Alford.

This Tribute is prepared not merely to pay my highest respect to Professor Alford for his passion and compassion in legal education, but also to remind those who engage in legal education that there could be some elements missing in the design and practice of the current legal education in many jurisdictions. Professor Alford, being a hao laoshi and teaching both by words and by his own example, helps us to revisit the current legal education and to identify aspects of legal education that need to be emphasized.

This Tribute is not to propagate the virtues of a remarkable individual only because I know him well. I am sure people who know Professor Alford would agree on what I have mentioned. The fact that Professor Alford was awarded so many honors[14] in so many places shows that he has been globally recognized for his academic achievements and his contributions to many societies in different corners of the world.

Professor William Alford is hao laoshi based on the most rigid standards. I am proud of the fact that he is my laoshi.

[hr gap=”20″]

* Taiwan’s Permanent Representative to the World Trade Organization (“WTO”); former Justice of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of China; former Dean of National Taiwan University College of Law. Professor Alford was the second reader of the author’s SJD thesis at Harvard Law School. The author would like to express thanks for the opportunity to participate in the publication of the Tribute. He can be reached at lohuang@ntu.edu.tw.

[1] For a full list of Professor Alford’s areas of interest, see William P. Alford, Harv. L. Sch., https://hls.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/10010/Alford (last visited Nov. 25, 2020) [hereinafter Alford].

[2] After 18 Years, Professor Alford Completes his Tenure as Vice Dean for the Graduate Program and ILS, Harv. L. Today (August 17, 2020), https://today.law.harvard.edu/after-18-years-professor-alford-completes-his-tenure-as-vice-dean-for-the-graduate-program-and-ils/.

[3] Alford, supra note 1.

[4] See An Oral History of the Special Olympics in China (William P. Alford, Mei Liao & Fengming Cui eds., 2020); for brief introductions of these volumes, see Our Work, HPOD, https://hpod.law.harvard.edu/publications (last visited Nov. 25, 2020).

[5] See HPOD, supra note 4, Our Mission.

⁶  Id.

[7] Board of Directors, Special Olympics, https://www.specialolympics.org/about/board-of-directors (last visited Nov. 25, 2020).

[8] Id. William Alford.

[9] Typically, each year the LLM program at Harvard Law School accepts 180 students from about 70 countries. LLM Program, Harv. L. Sch., https://hls.harvard.edu/dept/graduate-program/llm-program/ (last visited Nov. 25, 2020).

[10] Harv. L. Today, supra note 2.

[11] Id.

[12] This is the statement made by Ruth Okediji, LLM ’91 SJD. Id.

[13] Id.

[14] These honors include an honorary doctorate in law by the University of Geneva; an honorary professor or fellow at Renmin University of China, Zhejiang University, the National College of Administration, and the Institute of Law of the Chinese Academy of Social Science; the inaugural O’Melveny & Myers Centennial Award; the Kluwer China Prize; the Qatar Pearls of Praise Award; an Abe (Japan) Fellowship; and the Harvard Law School Alumni Association Award. Alford, supra note 1.

Jerome A. Cohen
Professor of Law, New York University School of Law

Putting Lawyers (of All Types) High on Professor Alford’s Future Agenda

Happily, this is neither an obituary nor a tribute to a retiring teacher, but an expression of thanks for the extraordinary number of years that William Alford has impressively devoted to the major challenges of academic administration at a great international law school. Yet this should also be seen as a celebration of liberation, marking a new period and new possibilities for the honoree’s already illustrious scholarly career. Given the daily increasing prominence of China and the still underappreciated significance of its distinctive legal system, he need not fear the dilemmas of Charles Lamb’s “Superannuated Man,” nor dread the observation of Henry Adams that “nothing is more tiresome than a superannuated pedagogue.”

Indeed, Professor Alford’s problem is precisely the opposite. A classic scholarly multitasker, he has too many temptations on his plate. In addition to continuing the innovative and stimulating teaching that has informed over three decades of the world’s future lawyers, law professors, and researchers to the benefits of studying comparative law, he will, of course, continue to lead the Harvard program in East Asian Legal Studies that has fostered the training of so many promising young scholars and produced so many distinguished contributions to learning and practical affairs. But what will be his future research priorities?

Professor Alford has already done much to build on and choose from. As he has demonstrated, China’s millennial legal traditions offer lifetimes of satisfying preoccupation and appear increasingly relevant to contemporary understanding. Chairman Mao Zedong’s revolution has become Chairman Xi Jinping’s imperious and, some would say, imperial rule. Professor Alford and his able academic partner and spouse Yuanyuan Shen have also sought to remind us of the importance of modern China’s family law, a subject that attracted great interest in the 1950s as one of the first legal consequences of communist “liberation,” but that has largely faded from public view despite the subsequent huge changes in Chinese society. Or he surely might wish to further develop our knowledge of China’s laws and practices relating to people with special disabilities, a field that he has done much to create and even to foster beyond academe. Also notable is his longstanding thoughtful concern for the roles that lawyers and their functional substitutes have played or ought to play in post-1949 Chinese political, economic, and social life, a topic that might well be extended to focus on intensifying restrictions on criminal defense lawyers and repression of human rights lawyers.

Yet there are so many other areas of comparative and international law relating to China that cry out for exploration and that would benefit from his attention. For example, the myriad complex constitutional and criminal justice problems revealed by the Central Government’s recent “takeover” of what in 1997 had been the United Kingdom’s “handover” of Hong Kong to the motherland could easily prove totally absorbing. And Beijing’s lack of success in attempting to impose “one country, two systems” on Taiwan has enabled the island’s talented and courageous people to establish a democratic legal system that is genuinely different from the mainland’s increasingly totalitarian counterpart and that warrants greater study for many reasons. So too does the emerging effort of the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”) to employ public international law in a powerful campaign to displace the United States as the dominant influence in the United Nations and related organizations. And Professor Alford would have much to say about the implications for the law of genocide and crimes against humanity of the horrors that the PRC persists in perpetrating in its Xinjiang and Tibetan regions.

The list of potential topics is long, and he will feel more than ever the tensions occasioned by the need to choose. Justice Brandeis wisely observed: “Self-limitation is the master’s mark.” Yet Robert Browning urged: “A man’s reach should exceed his grasp or what’s a Heaven for?”

Other contributors to this welcome Festschrift undoubtedly have their own ideas, but I want to take the opportunity extended by the invitation to participate to suggest that Professor Alford expand on his previous work relating to China’s contemporary lawyers and various functional substitutes operating in different arenas of a vast, diverse and all-too-opaque country. Perhaps it is not surprising that, as he has pointed out, we still know far too little about the “litigation sticks” as well as the courthouse scribes, innkeepers, and others who sought to assist, for good or ill, the defenseless targets of the criminal justice system of the Manchu-Qing dynasty, the last in a lengthy imperial succession. Yet, despite the obstacles created by the efficient secrecy of Xi Jinping’s Party-state, it seems more urgent to inquire systematically and comprehensively into the lawyers of today. Professor Alford and other students of the sociology of law have already told us a great deal, but, as they would be the first to admit, they have only scratched the surface, whetting our appetite to learn about 2020 realities.

There is, of course, more than a single “legal profession” in China at present, even if one excludes from consideration the large number of legally-trained participants at various levels in the overlapping government and Communist Party bureaucracies, the judiciary, the procuracy (prosecutors’ offices), the legislative institutions, the law school faculties, the government-sponsored research organizations, and the range of specialists who perform tax, accounting, intellectual property, labor, notarial, and other law-related functions.

There are many kinds of practicing lawyers in the PRC today. Most apparent to foreigners are the “big law” commercial law firms that now rival in numbers of licensed personnel and revenues the international firms that they have learned from and emulate. They often have multiple offices within the country and even some foreign offices. Some have created various forms of cooperation with foreign counterparts at home and abroad. Yet most licensed lawyers operate in medium- to small-size clusters, congregating in China’s many urban centers. There are also some—but far from enough—who work in more dispersed, rural areas where finding enough colleagues to form a firm often remains a challenge.

However, many other persons who are not licensed lawyers also perform a range of legal services as para-professionals. They usually receive official financial and other support and operate among people who are less well-served by licensed professionals, in urban as well as rural areas. Under a variety of names, they have rivaled the formal legal professionals in their numbers and in the quantity, if not the quality and scope, of legal service provided. Professor Alford astutely recognized and has long followed the tensions and developments that this too little appreciated competition has created in what he has termed “the battle over legal professionalism in China.”

A generation ago, in a series of publications, Professor Alford called our attention to this emerging phenomenon and the disturbing conflicts of interest and ethical infractions that both professional and para-professionals were encountering. One essay, attractively titled “Tasselled Loafers for Barefoot Lawyers,” particularly caught my interest.[1] Fifteen years later, in a detailed 2010 update, he gave the PRC’s non-professional “basic-level legal workers” another colorful sobriquet, christening them “rice-roots legal workers” because of their autochthonous involvements.[2]

To me, an interesting aspect of this latter essay was its brief discussion of what should be recognized as yet another broad category of unlicensed functional substitutes for legal professionals—genuine “barefoot lawyers,” those who not only lack “tasseled loafers” but are also so poor and uneducated that they utterly lack the background and training deemed desirable for “rice-roots lawyers.” Professor Alford selected as an example of “barefoot lawyers” the blind Shandong province rural activist Chen Guangcheng, whose initial efforts to use local courts to protect the rights and interests of fellow villagers attracted favorable national publicity in the earliest years of this century.

My personal acquaintance with Chen’s case is probably the main reason that I focus here on Professor Alford’s studies of Chinese lawyers and admiringly suggest that he devote substantial time to research on the professional/para-professional tensions and developments of the most recent decade.

I had met Chen when he and his extraordinarily devoted wife were State Department sponsored visitors to the United States in early 2003 and invited them to Beijing that fall while I was serving as a visiting professor at Tsinghua University Law School. After a long afternoon in a Beijing bookstore purchasing many surprisingly good “how to do it” pamphlets devised to help non-lawyers cope with legal problems, Chen invited my wife and me to visit his literally dirt-poor village in Shandong’s remote countryside. No one, he persuaded me, could fully appreciate the plight of “barefoot lawyers” and their “clients” without such a visit. Three days of interviews with Chen; his often penniless, elderly, disabled, and uneducated “clients”; and other villagers vividly illustrated the situation.

There were then five lawyers in the county seat, unlike some Chinese counties that had no lawyers whatever. But the local lawyers reportedly could not be relied on to take on cases of impoverished villagers who wanted to bring grievances against country government offices or the administrative village governments below them. There was no money in it for the lawyers. Moreover, being dependent on local officials for much of their work, the lawyers did not want to bite the hand that fed them. As an alternative, the local “rice-roots legal workers” were available in principle, but, because they were on the government payroll, they failed to inspire popular confidence in their independence. This had inspired Chen to attempt to fill the gap in legal services through his own self-study and initiatives.

Encouraged by the national publicity first accorded his efforts, Chen hoped to recruit at least two “barefoot lawyers” for each of over forty neighboring villages. With the aid of Beijing lawyers and law teachers, he hoped to organize informal training for these recruits at the only hotel in the area. In an effort to enlist help from the Tsinghua University Law School, I arranged for Chen to meet with the then dean and the deputy dean of the school plus the Beijing lawyer who was most active in supervising the school’s relevant clinical program. Chen, an articulate speaker, made what I thought was an effective presentation of the perceived need for training and his ideas for meeting it. Yet, except for the sincerely interested Dean Wang Chenguang, who later served as visiting professor at both Harvard and New York University law schools, Chen’s reception from the other two important legal figures was frosty, indeed embarrassingly impolite. They were hostile to assisting “barefoot lawyers,” who they were certain would only ruin their efforts to enhance popular respect for the legal profession. They gave no weight whatsoever to the fact that millions of rural citizens throughout the country had no meaningful access to independent legal services. As they ostentatiously read the day’s newspapers during Chen’s presentation, I was glad for once that he is blind.

Undeterred, Chen nevertheless asked me to take part in the proposed training. I agreed to do so but did not share his optimism. I warned him that county officials would never allow us to conduct training for almost a hundred would-be “barefoot lawyers” who could be expected to cause them nothing but trouble. Before we were put to the test, however, Chen was detained and placed under around-the-clock house arrest and ultimately convicted and imprisoned for more than four years because of his court challenges and other public opposition to the provincial government’s arbitrary punishments of the families of thousands of local women who had fled compulsory abortion and sterilization.

This personal experience led me to share Professor Alford’s belief that China’s government, the Communist Party, the Ministry of Justice, and the professional bar cannot remain indifferent to seriously inadequate legal representation, especially in the countryside, and should take vigorous steps to rectify the situation. This would improve—not damage—the reputation of China’s legal profession, and Professor Alford’s continuing strong support for this reform would surely speed its progress.

[hr gap=”20″]

[1] William P. Alford, Tasselled Loafers for Barefoot Lawyers: Transformation and Tension in the World of Chinese Legal Workers, 141 China Q. 22 (1995).

[2] William P. Alford, “Second lawyers, first principles”: lawyers, rice-roots legal workers, and the battle over legal professionalism in China, in Prospects for the Professions in China 43 (William P. Alford, Kenneth Winston & William C. Kirby eds., 2010).

Chang Seung-Wha 
Professor at Seoul National University School of Law and Chairman of Korea Trade Commission

Platform Nine and Three-Quarters in Harvard Law Station

It is my great honor to write a tribute to Professor William Alford for his retirement from his vice deanship at Harvard Law School (HLS). I have had the pleasure of getting to know Professor Alford in a number of different capacities over the years. Thirty years ago, he was my academic co-advisor at HLS. He was also my colleague when I was invited to teach at HLS as a visiting professor twice. He was always an enthusiastic supporter whenever I applied to academic or other professional positions including the WTO Appellate Body. Recently, during my tenure for the deanship for Seoul National University School of Law (SNU Law), he was my partner (counterpart) representing HLS for the two institutions’ academic collaboration. He has been a life-long mentor and consultant (of course, free of charge) whenever I needed to make important personal and professional decisions in my life. Most importantly, I am proud to call him one of my best friends. I guess I am entitled to write this humble tribute to Professor Alford.

HE WAS A GATEWAY TO THE HEART OF HLS: It was back in 1991 when I first met him at HLS. At that time, I was a former Seoul District Court judge who had decided to pursue graduate studies with an aim to become an academic. Before then, I had never been in English-speaking countries and naturally felt like an alien upon my arrival in Cambridge. To me, all the HLS professors were Professor Kingsfield in The Paper Chase. Even though I was a member of the HLS community, besides attending several classes, I was very scared and intimidated before many Professor Kingsfields, perhaps for linguistic and cultural reasons. Hence, I could not attempt to genuinely enter the HLS academic community.  Then, Professor Alford approached me with the warm, human smile that every student who has worked with him knows so well. He opened the door wide open for me to enter the HLS world (not just classrooms) through his office. His office at the end of the Pound Hall corridor was like Platform Nine and Three-Quarters in King’s Cross Station leading into the magical world of Harry Potter! I recall that including myself, many international students always knocked on the door of his office not only to see him, but also to enter the HLS academic forum through his kind guidance. Without his heart-warming welcome in his office, hundreds of international students like myself might merely have lingered around the HLS campus as “muggles” until graduation, without ever finding the entrance to the magical “H world”.

HE IS A KIND AND ENTHUSIASTIC, BUT STRICT TEACHER: For the last thirty years, I suspect Professor Alford has supervised several hundred students’ theses on international and comparative law subjects. In September every year, several dozen incoming students ask for his supervision of their dissertations. Whenever he can not do it himself, he always kindly advises many students on how to find suitable professors within HLS. At this time, I cannot avoid revealing a secret between us, which he may not remember now. As he was a very popular professor and many students approached him for his academic mentorship, I assumed my chance to have him as an advisor was slim. I instead approached another professor for my L.L.M. thesis supervision, but this professor was hesitant because my LLM thesis topic was not about U.S. law, but too international and comparative for him. At that difficult time, Professor Alford saved me by persuading that professor to co-supervise my LLM thesis with him. Many times, I proudly told others that Professor Alford volunteered to co-supervise my thesis, but the truth is he actually saved me when I was frustrated with serious difficulties in finding a thesis supervisor. He was this kind and enthusiastic teacher, but at the same time very strict and demanding when teaching and supervising his students. For example, I needed to see him for comments and advice on my draft LLM and SJD dissertations, perhaps more than thirty times.

HIS ACADEMIC MENTORSHIP NEVER ENDS: Professor Alford’s academic mentorship did not end when his students left HLS. For example, when I practiced at a Washington, D.C., law firm after my SJD program, he always encouraged me to pursue an academic career, which led me to teach at Georgetown as an adjunct professor. Without his encouragement, I might have ended up as a practicing attorney, rather than becoming a fulltime academic at my alma mater, SNU Law. I believe he has done the same thing for at least a hundred of his former HLS students. His own academic achievements in the field of international and comparative law are enormous and so difficult to summarize in this short tribute. Instead, I would rather highlight that Professor Alford has produced dozens of avatars who are now recognized as leading scholars in international and comparative law all over the world, although not in the exoplanet of Pandora.

His mentorship again did not end with helping his former students become academics in international and comparative law. For the last thirty years, he has quietly created an unnamed global academic circle under the big umbrella of HLS. For example, he often helped his former students and HLS visitors establish connections and collaborate with each other in various academic activities in international and comparative law. He was also an active co-organizer of the Harvard-Stanford International Junior Faculty Forum where he invited talented junior scholars in international and comparative law from various countries.

HE PERSISTENTLY PUSHED HIS FORMER STUDENTS TO BROADEN THEIR LIMITS: Whenever I encountered critical decision-making moments in my professional life, Professor Alford always encouraged me to reach further and jump higher. Without him, I might have turned to other easier and more comfortable jobs. Without his support, I would not have pursued my SJD degree. Without his encouragement, I would not have moved from Washington, D.C., to Seoul to become a full-time academic. Without his guidance, I would not have tried to teach at many leading law schools in the world beyond Korea. Whenever I hesitated to broaden my horizon, he kindly, but persistently said, “You can and should do it!” Again, what I want to emphasize here is not that Professor Alford was special only to me, but that he did the same thing for his other former students who are now recognized as leading scholars in international and comparative law.

HE CONVERTED HLS INTO A GENUINELY GLOBAL LAW SCHOOL: Three decades ago, surely HLS was a leading law school in the United States, but it did not appear to function as a global center for international and comparative legal studies. In the eyes of a new foreign student, it was ironic that although many world-renowned scholars in the field of international and comparative law visited HLS, and many of the most talented foreign students were there, not many HLS professors were interested in international subjects, nor was the HLS curriculum very internationally oriented. Ever since Professor Alford took on the role as an international face of HLS, things have gradually, but vividly changed. Under his leadership, HLS has become a world leader in the field of international and comparative studies.

Under his vice deanship, the HLS curriculum improved in terms of its international focus. Compared to the early 1990s when I was a student, diverse courses in international subjects have become available for HLS students. His effort to make mandatory at least one international or comparative law course for all HLS JD students undoubtedly contributed to opening all HLS students’ eyes to the world beyond the United States.

This curriculum change seemed to go hand in hand with his extra efforts to invite more world-renowned international scholars to visit and teach at HLS, which enriched the curriculum to be far more diverse and international. I realized HLS began to change when I was invited to teach WTO law courses in the 2007–08 academic year. When I came back to HLS once again in 2011, I witnessed even more meaningful changes in the same direction.

Professor Alford’s effort to make HLS the leading international law school did not end with changing the curriculum or inviting more renowned foreign professors to HLS. He also engaged HLS professors for the purpose of helping them broaden their horizons beyond U.S. law and policy. Many times, he connected HLS professors and their counterparts in foreign law schools while sparing his valuable time to make arrangements for many HLS faculty members to visit foreign academic institutions in order to share their ongoing research or exchange academic wisdom. For example, during his vice deanship, a dozen HLS faculty members visited Korea and in particular SNU Law. SNU was just one of many leading academic institutions outside the United States that benefitted from Professor Alford’s leadership.

HE WAS AN EXPORTER OF THE HLS MODEL: Perhaps it is not well-known that Professor Alford has been exporting the best of the HLS model of legal education to other leading law schools outside the United States. His effort in this regard also contributed to making HLS a model law school around the world. For example, he was keen to help other foreign law schools follow the HLS model not only in international and comparative legal studies, but also in other subjects such as clinical education and pro bono programs as well. A few years ago, he himself welcomed the SNU Law delegation’s visit to HLS and encouraged HLS clinicians and pro bono work leaders to share their clinical education and pro bono program models with the SNU delegation. In exchange, he also sent out HLS pro bono program representatives to SNU Law to pave the path for HLS in the future to send HLS students abroad for their pro bono work. Following the HLS model, SNU Law under my deanship further activated the clinical education and pro bono programs, with an ambition to become an Asian role model in those programs. This is merely one example of how Bill contributed to turning HLS into a global legal education center, one that exports desirable models of legal education for many foreign law schools to follow.

I cannot imagine what my professional life would look like without Bill Alford. I would suspect that more than a hundred of his former students might feel the same way. What would HLS would look like in the absence of his eighteen-year commitment and service as Vice Dean? I cannot imagine that either.

Mark Wu
Vice Dean for the Graduate Program and International Legal Studies & Henry L. Stimson Professor of Law, Harvard Law School

Lessons in Virtue:

Tribute to Professor William P. Alford

“A flower cannot blossom without sunshine nor a garden without love”

Unlike many of the esteemed contributors to this volume, I never had the privilege of learning from Professor William Alford in the classroom formally or having him serve as my dissertation supervisor. But what I have gained from Bill, through a decade as his colleague and mentee at Harvard Law School, are life lessons in how to develop wisdom as a teacher and embody virtue as a person.

The lessons gained from this wise, yet humble, master are hard to reduce to words. When pondering how to do so, I stumbled across a Chinese proverb, which I quote at the beginning of this tribute. One could read this proverb as discussing the necessary ingredients for sustaining natural beauty in an otherwise harsh world. But an equally apt interpretation of the proverb is that it discusses the necessary ingredients for human relationships. Bill’s endless bounty of sunshine and love has sustained so many of us through our years at Harvard Law. It is that radiant energy in its many forms that we honor in this volume and will cherish for many years to come.

Through his rigorous devotion to countless individuals, Bill has cultivated thousands of flowers in the garden that is the Graduate Program and International Legal Studies at Harvard Law School. As several of the other tributes in this volume attest, these individuals have pollinated ideas, often uncovered thanks to Bill, throughout the academy and legal profession worldwide. Bill’s tireless dedication literally has transformed not only how we think, but also how we advocate for others, in dozens of societies worldwide. Meanwhile, each summer, Bill begins the process anew, carefully cultivating yet another crop of new Harvard Law School students to make their mark in the world at-large. Throughout the year, we, his colleagues, enjoy the benefit of his toil, without necessarily appreciating the care and devotion necessary to sustain the annual bounty. Under his leadership, the Graduate Program and International Legal Studies have become unparalleled world-renowned gems, widely recognized as the best in the world.[1]

Bill, and his equally talented wife, Yuanyuan, have always preferred to have the focus shine on others, without regard for the many sacrifices that they have made to allow others to thrive. Like so many others, I consider myself to be one of the lucky beneficiaries. Each of us can recount the precise moments when one of Bill’s actions took on outsize meaning in our lives, at a moment when we needed it most. Certainly, Bill has taught me plenty over the years about what it means to be an academic, a policy advocate, and an administrator. But what he has taught me most, simply through his actions, is what it means to be both a mensch and a hao laoshi (好老師).[2]

Through three snapshots captured from different periods of my past decade spent with Bill at Harvard Law, I hope to capture a bit of how his wisdom and virtue have enriched my life and those of countless others.

Hold Open Doors for Others to Walk Through

My first sustained interaction with Bill took place in June 2010, while I was still an Academic Fellow at Columbia Law and before I joined the Harvard Law faculty. Bill and I had been introduced through Professor Ben Liebman, but at the time, we did not know each other well. Yet, Bill decided to invite me to come up from New York City to attend the 80^th birthday festschrift that he was hosting for Professor Jerry Cohen in Cambridge. Needless to say, I was a fish out of water. In a room full of some of the world’s most eminent scholars of Chinese law, I was but a mere post-doctoral fellow and not yet an assistant professor. Yet, Bill took it upon himself to introduce me to many of them individually.

Bill had no reason to invite me to the festschrift; at the time, he had no idea that I had been a devoted attendee of Jerry’s China series at the Council on Foreign Relations.[3] Nor did he have anything to gain from spending time introducing me to so many of his friends. Yet, Bill gladly did so. He derives genuine joy from opening doors for the next generation, affording them the opportunity to develop their own connections in the rich network that he has cultivated over the years. Indeed, I have seen him do so on numerous occasions for others throughout the years.

As is true of the esteemed birthday honoree that weekend, Bill always takes an interest in wanting to understand the interests and motivations of young people. He sees a potential in them that they often have yet to discover for themselves. He makes you believe that you can achieve great things, and he is genuinely committed to assisting you in pursuing your dreams. That weekend was the moment that I knew that I had been embraced into the fold of the community of China law scholars that Jerry and Bill had cultivated at Harvard Law.[4]

Several of the individuals whom I first met that June weekend later became friends and professional collaborators. The event was but the first of many times when introductions from Bill have facilitated my own scholarship. Whether in Beijing, Geneva, Seoul, or Taipei, I am always encountering individuals asking of Bill, and whose own generosity toward me is based on their admiration and respect for Bill. From so many of those individuals and from Bill himself, I have learned much that has shaped my views of contemporary China. But from Bill that weekend, I learned something more—how a small gesture, such as inviting one more young person to a conference, can open large doors that smooth the way for others to pursue their dreams.

Care About the People Who Are Most Important to Those Who Matter to You

We are taught to separate the professional from the personal at the workplace. Bill, however, has always understood that it is impossible to separate someone from those whom they care most about. He has made it his mission to care not only about his students and colleagues, but also about their families and those who matter most to those who matter to him. I am always astonished at how Bill’s razor-sharp memory can recall details of not just those whom he taught more than a decade ago, but also details of their families. Indeed, when overseas, I often find that it is not just his former students who inquire about him, but also their spouses, who share fond memories of their time spent with Bill and Yuanyuan.

I experienced this deep caring myself during a particularly difficult period in my life when I was a junior faculty member at Harvard. The article that I was planning to submit as the final piece for my tenure file had garnered negative reactions from some of my colleagues, yet I was determined to not alter it dramatically even if it meant that my tenure promotion would be delayed.[5] Most weeks, my wife traveled for work, so on several nights, I was left to care for my two young children alone. But the straw that broke the camel’s back was when my mother was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease. She was unwilling to allow others to care for her and having a particularly difficult time acclimating to the assisted living center to which we had moved her.

Years before, during my first year on the Harvard Law faculty, I brought my toddler to the faculty lunch room. Later that day, a friendly colleague approached me to say I should avoid doing so, lest other colleagues develop the wrong impression that my family obligations was detracting from my scholarship. Ever since then, I’ve kept details of my family life fairly guarded from my colleagues. But despite my best efforts to do so, Bill could intuit that something was off.

Sitting alone in his office, I succumbed to confiding to Bill about my mother’s disease and the immense pressure and grief that I felt watching as she helplessly morphed into an entirely different person. Bill took it all in, listened with empathy, and at the end of it, gave me a hug. He then shared his own wise thoughts about how to handle the difficult journey that lay before me. Concerned as he might have been about my professional life at that precarious moment, he was most concerned about me as a person.

It would be that way throughout my remaining years as junior faculty. Almost every encounter, whether in the hallway or discussing one of my drafts, would begin with Bill asking, “How is your mother?” He genuinely wanted to know, and I was more than happy to share. The imprint of Bill’s scholarship on mine is quite evident, across a range of issues from intellectual property[6] to anti-dumping[7] to the Chinese legal profession.[8]  But what is less apparent is the imprint of his humanity on my own. Through his own example, he taught me that to care about others, you need to also care about those who matter the most to them. Only then can you truly learn how to have an impact on the lives of others.

If It Matters to Someone, Give It Your All

In the midst of a global pandemic, I stepped into the large shoes that Bill had left for me to fill as Vice Dean. Each week, I am reminded of how much more there is for me to learn about this job, in order to nurture the garden that Bill has so carefully cultivated throughout his deanship.[9] Together with the outstanding senior administrators in the program, we have sought to tackle the challenges thrown our way—from ever-changing immigration rules to uncertain delays in the administration of the bar exam.

What I have most admired about Bill in this most recent shared experience is his devotion to any matter, no matter how big or small, if it matters to someone else’s well-being. The impact of Bill’s advocacy may be obvious to others, when it comes to an immigration issue or securing additional seats in a classroom for LL.M. students. The same is true of human rights and disability issues—two areas very close to Bill’s heart, which others have highlighted in this volume.

What I have witnessed firsthand over the past few months is how Bill engages with the same relentless, creative energy on issues that, to others, may not seem to be of the magnitude worthy of the sustained attention of a former Vice Dean and one of the most eminent scholars of Chinese and comparative law. For example, several LL.M. students highlighted the difficulties they faced when experiencing temporary connectivity issues from overseas and then asking for notes from classmates for the missed portion of class. Some might react by saying that these students simply need to conjure up the nerve to ask a classmate. But Bill took it upon himself to examine why they faced difficulties and probe for possible solutions. He also decided to highlight to colleagues why small steps to fix a problem that might appear seemingly trivial at first glance nevertheless mattered greatly to particular students.

No matter the issue, if it matters to someone, Bill has taught me the importance of giving it one’s all. Indeed, Bill’s devotion is so relentless that I find myself reminding him of the need to take care of himself as well as others. After all, there is a lot more wisdom to be shared and a lot more virtue to be gained from the infinitely kind, humble, gracious person that is Bill Alford. May he continue to transform the lives of many more, with his sunny disposition and his love, as he embarks on the next chapter of his professional life in the years to come.

[hr gap=”20″]

[1] See QS World University Rankings, Law, https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2020/law-legal-studies.

[2] Please refer to the relevant contributions by Professor Michael Stein and Ambassador and former Justice Chang-fa Lo for further elaboration of these terms, as applied to Professor Alford.

[3] For an overview of Professor Cohen’s tremendous impact on the development of China’s legal system and Western understanding of it, see Pamela Krueger, China’s Legal Lion, NYU Law Mag., https://blogs.law.nyu.edu/magazine/2009/jerome-cohen-profile/.

[4] It is therefore only fitting that Bill is the inaugural holder of the Jerome A. and Joan L. Cohen Professor of Law. Bill’s excellent lecture, “Learning from the Past to Appreciate the Present,” commemorating this occasion is available at https://youtu.be/tb56AFcY11Q.

[5] Bill’s guidance was instrumental in my decision to leave much of the article unaltered and to further emphasize the difficulty of resorting to legal solutions. Soon thereafter, the article was published in an earlier volume of this journal. See Mark Wu, The ‘China, Inc.’ Challenge to Global Trade Governance, 57 Harv. Int’l L.J. 261 (2016).

[6] See William P. Alford, To Steal a Book Is an Elegant Offense: Intellectual Property Law in Chinese Civilization (1995); William P. Alford, Making the World Safe for What? Intellectual Property Rights, Human Rights and Foreign Economic Policy in the Post-European Cold War World, 29 NYU. J. Int’l L. & Pol’y 135 (1996); William P. Alford, How Theory Does—and Does Not—Matter: American Approaches to Intellectual Property Law in East Asia, 13 UCLA Pac. Basin L.J. 8 (1994).

[7] See William P. Alford, When is China Paraguay? An Examination of the Application of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws of the United States to China and Other “Nonmarket Economy” Nations, 61 S. Cal. L. Rev. 79 (1987).

[8] See William P. Alford, Tasselled Loafers for Barefoot Lawyers: Transformation and Tension in the World of Chinese Legal Workers, 141 China Q. 22 (1995); William P. Alford, “Second Lawyers, First Principles”: Lawyers, Rice-Roots Legal Workers, and the Battle Over Legal Professionalism in China, in Prospects for the Professions in China 43 (William P. Alford, Kenneth Winston & William C. Kirby eds., 2010).

[9] For a fitting tribute to Bill’s achievements as Vice Dean, see After 18 Years, Professor Alford Completes Tenure as Vice Dean for the Graduate Program and ILS, Harv. L. Today, Aug. 17, 2020, https://today.law.harvard.edu/after-18-years-professor-alford-completes-his-tenure-as-vice-dean-for-the-graduate-program-and-ils/.

Michael Ashley Stein
Co-founder and Executive Director of the Harvard Law School Project on Disability; Visiting Professor at Harvard Law School

Scholar, Mensch, and Disability Rights Champion:

A Tribute to Professor William P. Alford

It is a deep honor and a sheer delight to join this Tribute for my very wonderful friend and colleague Professor William P. Alford, celebrating the eighteen years he enabled Harvard Law School (“HLS”) as vice dean for the Graduate Program and International Legal Studies. That period is part of the more than thirty years dedicated by Bill to developing international legal studies in and beyond the HLS community. Bill has been HLS’s backbone (or, in Chinese, gugan “骨干”) in these endeavors, fostering the international and comparative law curriculum, facilitating and supporting many of the globe’s leading international scholars to visit and teach; tirelessly and freely giving his already overextended time as a mentor to thousands of JD, LLM, and SJD students; chairing East Asian Legal Studies (“EALS”) the country’s oldest and most prominent related law program; and co-founding and chairing the Harvard Law School Project on Disability (“HPOD”), considered one of the globe’s most preeminent disability rights research and advocacy center—and all the while generating top-notch scholarship and being recognized as one of HLS’s most beloved teachers. Other contributors to this Tribute will take up Bill’s many virtues which have rightfully earned him generations of student devotees, an honorary doctorate, honorary professorships and fellowships, and the HLS Association’s highest accolade. As HPOD’s co-founder and executive director, and as his extremely fortunate collaborator, I will instead focus on Bill’s essential role in developing and encouraging HPOD and point out some of the work we have achieved worldwide over the past sixteen years. Readers seeking further details are encouraged to visit our website at www.hpod.org.
Bill and I were introduced in 2002 by our mutual and good friend Professor Martha Minow, who said, “You have complementary interests in disability rights and international law, and have a similar sense of humor.” As usual, she was correct. Bill was working with Special Olympics International and was thinking in advance about how to utilize the upcoming 2005 World Winter Games in Nagano and the 2007 World Summer Games in Shanghai to raise awareness about the rights of persons with intellectual disabilities in those countries, as well as globally. I was teaching at William & Mary Law School, was moving to HLS in 2003 to focus on scholarship as a visiting fellow at the Human Rights Program, and had just began the first of five years commuting to the United Nations in New York in order to participate in the negotiation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (“CRPD”), the first international human rights treaty specifically empowering disabled persons. We chatted for over an hour, and Bill’s been stuck with me ever since.

Bill and I co-founded HPOD in 2004, driven by our shared desire to conduct research and advocacy that would empower the over one billion disabled persons across the globe, with a special emphasis on individuals with intellectual disabilities. Since then, HPOD has been responsible for the development of a wealth of scholarship and numerous human rights education materials; the latter are available open-source and free on our website in multiple languages, including easy-to-read versions for self-advocates with intellectual disabilities, and videos featuring some of the self-advocates with whom we collaborate. Notably, we have worked in some forty-four countries, including increasingly at home in the United States, and always pro bono, on a range of projects ranging from law and policy reform to fomenting support groups for parents to advocate with and for their children with various disabilities. Our projects always involve local disabled persons and their representative organizations (“DPOs”) on the notions that everyone knows her own needs and priorities best, and that stakeholders must take pride and ownership in any activity. In doing so, HPOD adheres to the international disability rights mantra of “nothing about us without us.” We also have worked with a wide range of U.N. agencies, and like-minded civil society organizations and academic institutions. HPOD activities are developed and governed by an ethos of serving persons with disabilities, with humility, by learning from their lived experiences and scrupulously avoiding imperialistic presumptions. We also have intervened in dozens of cases involving disability rights at the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, national level Supreme and Constitutional courts, as well as other venues.

HPOD’s academic footprint has also been global. To give just one example, in 2007, HPOD partnered with Renmin University of China Law School (“Renda”) to convene the first disability rights conference in China. To do so, we brought disability rights scholars from around the world to discuss openly the different approaches that countries take to creating and enforcing national level obligations. Following on this cooperative dialogue, Renda created the first disability law clinic in China, exchanged scholars and students with HLS, and generated scholarship revolving around disability rights. Similarly, former HPOD visitors have gone on to teach the first disability rights courses in their home countries, and to generate the first disability rights scholarship in those nations.

HPOD activities include marvelous HLS students who bring their energy and enthusiasm and often develop life-long interests in advocating for persons with disabilities in their professional and personal lives after law school. In addition to sponsoring talks and other events, often featuring self-advocates with disabilities, Bill and I each teach disability rights courses, supervise student research, support visiting scholars, and endeavor to facilitate an evolving culture at HLS toward valuing disability as part of an overall culture of valuing diversity.

* * *

Beyond being able to celebrate some of HPOD’s terrific achievements since 2004, writing this tribute is a pleasure because it permits me to extol the virtues of the otherwise incredibly diffident Bill without his being able to deflect that praise. HPOD has succeeded in no small measure for the same reasons that EALS and international legal studies at HLS have succeeded—because of Bill’s wisdom, generosity, kindness, and devotion. He is an absolutely extraordinary person, and his friendship has been essential to HPOD as well as a great blessing in my life.

We, at HPOD, have been very fortunate to receive numerous awards for our work, collectively and individually, although our practice has been to accept these accolades communally, recognizing that our endeavors reflect teamwork and support. Among these manifold awards: the Parent Advocates for Visually Impaired Children (“PAVIC”) of the Philippines conferred their “National Advocate Award” to HPOD following on joint activities that resulted in 600 visually impaired children being enrolled in school; HPOD was feted by the National Grassroots Disability Organization and the National Counsel of Women with Disabilities, both of Bangladesh, for “tireless efforts, dedication, and solidarity” with local disability rights groups; Bill received the Li Buyun Law Prize for outstanding contributions to Chinese legal research, disability rights, and educational exchange; and I was named by Boston Globe Magazine as being among those “Bostonians Changing the World.”

Naturally these accolades encourage us and serve as affirmation of our work, and we are grateful for the attention they direct to HPOD. Yet Bill always seems happiest in the company of the self-advocates that HPOD serves, most pleased when members of HPOD’s DPO partners come to HLS and interact with our students, and proudest of the achievements that directly impact the lived experiences of those self-advocates and their families. Aside from the love he expresses to his family, no joy compares to the look on Bill’s face when moderating a panel of Special Olympic athletes or self-advocates with intellectual disabilities from Massachusetts Standing Strong or the Self-Advocacy Association of New York discussing their lives and how being able to claim their rights and be more active in their communities has improved their day-to-day experiences. Related, and emblematic of his tremendous empathy, it was a close competition between Bill and my own father as to who was happiest when I was given the inaugural Morten E. Ruderman Award in Inclusion, more recently bestowed on former U.S. Senator Tom Harkin who, among other achievements, sponsored the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Selfishly, and despite my deep regard for HLS, Bill’s stepping down makes me glad because it means he’ll be able to channel more of his working days toward HPOD, and we’ll have more time together to pursue justice for persons with disabilities and to engage on related teaching and scholarship. As I have made a point of reciting at every annual HPOD Open House, I feel supremely lucky to be able to work daily on projects I love, on behalf of individuals I love, and with colleagues I love. Thank you, Bill, for making that possible.