Empowered lives Resilient nations The information and designations used and the presentation of the material throughout this publication do not in any way imply the expression of an opinion on the part of the United Nations Development Programme or the United Nations System in China, concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

The presentation of the data and information contained in this publication, and the opinions expressed therein, do not necessarily re ect the position of the United Nations Development Programme or the United Nations System in China.

Published by the United Nations Development Programme © 2014 All rights reserved

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Foreword

Rule of law and access to justice are essential to human development. The protection of the law protects people from vulnerabilities to abuse, guarantees their access to basic services and expands their abilities to participate in the decisions that shape their lives.

In China, one key objective of judicial reform is to build the institutional capacity of the judiciary to ensure justice for all. UNDP has been supporting China’s judicial reform since the first five-year judicial reform programme was launched by the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) in the 1999. Throughout the three five-year judicial reform programmes, UNDP has offered policy advice and international expertise to assist the SPC on a number of its judicial reform priorities, such as people’s assessors pilots, open trial, alternative dispute resolution and judicial aid system reform.

2013 was a pivotal year in China for judicial reform with measures adopted to enhance judicial openness and to prevent the miscarriage of justice and with the plan for comprehensive legal and judicial reform that the Third Plenary Session adopted in November 2013.

This reports presents and analyses these recent developments in judicial reform in China and reflects on its possible future directions. It highlights pilot initiatives at the level of the court, the procuratorate and the judicial administrative organ, and underlines the importance of the independence of judiciary. The report also analyses key issues for the next stage of China’s judicial reform over the period 2014- 2018 and underlines the crucial value of an overarching roadmap, as well as coordinated efforts by all stakeholders.

UNDP is pleased to have supported Professor Xu Xin and his research team in the preparation of this comprehensive review. We hope that the present report and the views it offers will be of interest and use to policy-makers, law professors, international and national experts and all those, who have an interest in judicial reform in China.

Christophe Bahuet

Country Director UNDP China

Contents

Introduction...... 1 I. General Reform Measures...... 3 i. Enhancing Judicial Independence...... 3 ii. Abolishing the Practice of Re-education Through Labor...... 6 iii.The First Major Revision of the Administrative Litigation Law...... 8 iv.Further Preventing Miscarriage of Justice Cases...... 9 v. Reflection and Reform of Judicial Interpretations...... 11 vi.Improving the Juvenile Justice System...... 12 II. Reform Measures in the Court System...... 14 (I) Enhancing Judicial Credibility...... 14 i. Promoting Judicial Transparency...... 15 ii. Improving Court Ethics...... 17 iii.Improving the Relationship between Judge and Lawyer...... 18 iv.Strengthening Capacity Building of Judicial Professionals...... 20 (II) Better Exercising of Trial Power...... 20 i. Advancing the Collegial Trial Panel Reform...... 22 ii. Conducting Pilot Jury System Reform...... 24 iii.Improving Case Evaluation Practice...... 26 (III) Optimization of Court Function...... 27 i. Improving Guiding Case Mechanism...... 27 ii. Advancing Enforcement Reform...... 27 iii.Improving State Compensation...... 28 III. Reform Measures of the Procuratorate...... 30 i. Deepening Reform of the Anti-Corruption System...... 30 ii. Procurator’s Accountability Pilot Program...... 32 iii.Strengthening Oversight of Illegal Investigation...... 34 iv.Strengthening Procuratory Oversight in Civil Litigation...... 35 v. Strengthening Procuratory Function in Criminal Appeals...... 35 vi.Strengthening the Capacity Building of Procurators...... 35 vii.Advancing Procuratory Transparency...... 36 IV. Reforms Measures in Judicial Administration...... 37 i. Legal Aid Work Improvement...... 37 ii. Evidence-Based Correction Pilot Projects...... 38 iii. Strengthening the Professionalism of Lawyer Management...... 38 Conclusion...... 40 Overall Design of Judicial Reform...... 40 (I) Five Relationships...... 41 i. Strategic Arrangement of Judicial Reform...... 41 ii. Judicial Independence...... 41 iii. Judicial Review...... 42 iv. Optimize Judicial Structure of Function and Power...... 42 v. Final Resolution by Judicial Decision...... 43 (II) Six Securities and Safeguards...... 43 i. Job Security...... 43 ii. Funding Security...... 43 iii. Safeguarding Fairness and Justice...... 43 iv. Safeguarding Efficiency...... 44 v. Safeguarding Democracy...... 44 vi. Protection of the Disadvantaged...... 44 (III) Five Tactics...... 45 i. Differentiating Challenges...... 45 ii. De-Politicizing judicial reform...... 46 iii. Starting with the Court Itself...... 46 iv. Gathering Momentum...... 46 v. Improving the Quality of Legal Professionals...... 46 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 1 process. Safeguarding lawyers’ rights to practice, practice, to rights lawyers’ Safeguarding process. false charges, for accountability enforcing or misjudged cases, prosecuted wrongly basic such cases will provide and preventing The in the legal field. human rights protections will come up with an overall plan for a new new a for plan overall an with up come will The directives. specific with reforms of round security public the court,procuratorate, the administrative judicial department, the and reform will also map out their own branches needed to Specific key reforms measures. a unified are: judicial independence improve and finance, of personnel, system management exploring the organs; of judicial the logistics a certainpossibility to of separation, degree, of judicial jurisdictions administrative from divisions; and establishing a system regional selectingof judicial personnel managing and characteristics their of different the to according the efficacyexercise Improving of the profession. the changing will involve of judicial power and clarifying system, trial committee current and judge trial chief the of responsibilities the judicial Promoting trial panel. the collegial the functioning transparency and improving can monitors people’s and jurors people’s of the judicial to elements democratic add more the next ten years. Substantive reduction in the Substantive the next years. ten local authorities by of interference instances judicial and more branch and the executive Under the guidance expected. are independence government of the Decision, the central this way, the Decision identifies a direction and a direction the Decision and identifies this way, over further for reform space judicial up opens The Decision sets the goal of building a just, Decision sets the goal of building a just, The socialist judicial and authoritative efficient, with an emphasis on independent system, of exercise the improving trials, and prosecutions the democratic to and adherence judicial power, In of human rights. and protection operation Session laid out the general plan for deepening deepening for plan general the out Session laid on focusing way, in a comprehensive reforms priority and giving the rule of law strengthening in the legal field. reforms to The Third Plenary Third Session held in November was The the Decision on Major 2013 and adopted Deepening Comprehensive Issues Concerning Unlike “Decision”). (hereinafter Reforms which primarily focused conferences, previous Plenary Third the development, on economic reform, the overall atmosphere is obviously obviously is atmosphere overall the reform, Plenary Third Session of the on the contingent Party of China (CPC)18th Communist Central agenda. a future setting Committee decade. decade. forward, been small steps have there Although the transparency, judicial advocacyof the as such or misjudged of unjustly prosecuted prevention of judicial a new round and a draft plan for cases, 2013 was the year that would determine the the determine would that the year 2013 was the next in China for direction of judicial reforms Introduction meaningless, and consequently leading to an an leading to and consequently meaningless, Therefore, in the rule of law. regression overall bottom-up needs both reform judicial effective and strategic as systematic as well momentum the top. from planning By Xu Xin, Huang Yanhao, Wang Xiaotang Wang Yanhao, Huang Xin, By Xu Technology Beijing Institute of Judicial Studies, Advanced Institute For Lack of an overarching design may result result may design overarching an of Lack superficial, being short-sighted, in reforms deviatory or even in contradictory, repetitive, reform lead to eventually direction, which may take effect or becoming failing to measures Based on the above analysis and lessons lessons and analysis above Based on the of this new round years, past learned from needs a high-level urgently judicial reform it will be without which design, overarching markers. sailing without navigation like a vessel as overall reform of its political system. Judicial Judicial system. of its political reform as overall the utmost importance is of independence to in China, the ideal vision of rule of law realizing be needs to issue that and it is the bottom-line addressed. decision-makers are attune to these challenges these challenges to attune decision-makers are trial independence emphasized and have and a reduction in local and administrative a remains judicial independence interference, as well judicial reform, China’s critical for element administrative branch. This resistance poses the poses the resistance This branch. administrative of the the implementation to challenge greatest guiding a provided has Decision The Decision. implementing direction but is lacking concrete remains framework legal reform The measures. Although nature. reflecting its transitional vague, Yet there is resistance to deepening legal legal deepening to is resistance there Yet the local communist from especially reforms, and special interest agencies, government party, the reductionpossibilities in the fearing groups the and authorities local by interference for above-mentioned reforms concur with many with many concur above-mentioned reforms reports in the past annual recommendations implemented, if and Reform, Judicial China’s on legal in China’s progress in significant will result reform. 2

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 3 Qiang again emphasized the importance the Qiang again emphasized of the of trial power.” exercise “just and independent Theory Trial On October the China at 17, 2013, Deputy the Standing of Chief Justice Seminar, that stated Court,the Supreme Shen Deyong, enhancing judicial independence. At the national At enhancing judicial independence. of the provincial of the chief justices conference superior courtslevel held in June 2013, the Chief Court, Supreme Zhou Qiang, of China’s Justice to dare must levels all at “courts that emphasized that ensure to interference various stand up to independently its trial power the court exercises the mechanism law; to must improve according jurisdiction, jurisdiction, upgraded designated of jurisdiction; to continue must centralized and deterrence enforcement unified the implement local and mechanism, and must overcome In October 2013 departmental protectionism.” became a buzz word “trial independence” On October occasions. on several mentioned Tribunal Criminal Third the of head the 2013, 12, claimed Court, Changlin, Dai Supreme the of wrongly false charges, prevent to order “in that independent or misjudged cases, prosecuted On October 14, be guaranteed.” has to trial power of Criminal Workshop the 6th National 2013, at Court Zhou Supreme Chief Justice Justice, management system that reflects professional reflects professional that system management as a unified mechanism as well characteristics, and position exchange, recruitment, for and police procurators, of judges, promotion protects their job security. that officers Court, Supreme taking of advantage China’s undertook situation, supporting the favorable In Court April the Supreme 2013, initiatives. of experts a forum how discuss to convened by of the judicial system the credibility raise to the trial supervision hierarchy of the court the trial of the court supervision hierarchy and establishing a judicial personnel system; a responsibility/ accountability system that that system accountability a responsibility/ trial functions the presiding of combines thus letting panel, judge and the collegial make the decision and be the adjudicator clarifying the decision; the for accountable and court levels functions the of various at the proper establishment of jurisdictional of jurisdictional establishment the proper administrative from authorities separated application uniform the ensure so as to zoning reduce to measures The laws. of national include: reforming interference administrative scheme and installing the trial committee concrete measures. The measures to reduce reduce to measures The measures. concrete include: reforming interference local authorities’ promote to system the judicial management of personnel, the unified management of the local courts and materials and finance, and level, the provincial below procuratorate independence. independence. importance the judicial of reiterating While the Decision sets the direct independence, local by interference objective of reducing through branch authorities and the executive the law.” Although independent trial and trial independent and Although the law.” long been enshrined have powers prosecution of issuance the through Constitution, the in is prepared leadership the Decision the central judicial effort realize to make a greater to The Decision reiterated the Report adopted the Report Decision adopted reiterated The Congress the 18th National in 2013 by Party of China, which of the Communist the judiciary that and “ensuring stressed: their powers can exercise the procuratorate with in accordance and justly independently i. Enhancing Judicial Independence i. Enhancing Judicial I. General Reform Measures Reform I. General and related matters. This model does not model does not This matters. and related the by control administrative intensify higher court court, but rather of the lower and removal the appointment that means should be done of judges and chief justices the judge selectionby body within the court supplied to the judiciary can be removed the judiciarysupplied to removed can be The of local government. the control from judicial management “in Decision proposes system a unified management reform, and materials finance, of personnel, the court for and should be encouraged The level.” the provincial below procuratorate “vertical characterization of this as media’s triggered of the courtmanagement system” a misunderstanding of the supervision functions of the superior court the over misunderstanding a court, even and lower centralized government’s of the central In judicial management. fact, the relationship court the higher and lower between is only The and supervision.one of monitoring vertical finance, of personnel, management administrative only involves and materials 1. The personnel, finances, and material and material finances, personnel, The 1. procurators seminar, he reiterated the same the same he reiterated seminar, procurators In 2013, the Supreme December requirement. Reform Pilot The issued Procuratorate People's Responsibility Scheme; of Procurators Program independent the ensure to was objective its law. to according of procuratory powers exercise the direction out that the Decision pointed While judicial independence, is towards of reform and the court in some initiatives has taken not have proposals this direction, concrete comprehensive on the required emerged yet the to with regard instance, For reforms. the since reduction of local interference, the local party by interference and government a judicial justice, to is the main hindrance achieving judicial independence to prerequisite Possible interference. this rid of get to be will include: could approaches must be combined with adherence to the the to with adherence must be combined common leadership and to party’s communist In another chief judicial practice. July 2013, at class, Cao Jianming, the Chief Procurator of of the Chief Procurator Jianming, Cao class, established the Procuratorate Supreme China’s in carrying that requirement out comprehensive work, and just procuratory the in reform of procuratory powers exercise independent court system. the court, to the procuratorate Compared independence did not especially emphasize in its procuratory functions. In 2013 at May training chief procurators’ the new provincial However, trial independence cannot be achieved cannot be achieved trial independence However, of the concept. the reiteration only through the of root the target to have reforms Instead, Also, issue and undertake change. systematic must be practiced trial within the independence the dignity and authority of the Constitution the dignity and authorityof the Constitution of trial reiteration frequent The and the law.” leadership top the court’s by independence reforms, for to push reflects their determination within the reforms for helpful which is definitely outside interference. court resist and to system any illegal interference such as power, money, money, power, as such interference illegal any continuously and connections, relationship, the court that ensure to the system improve its judicial exercises justly and independently safeguard and resolutely law, to according power Enhancing Judicial Credibility was published published was Credibility Enhancing Judicial demand language to using unusually adamant of the constitutional the firm implementation Opinions The principle of judicial independence. of local and various forms resist “resolutely read: eliminate resolutely departmentalprotectionism, trial judge and collegial panel members are panel members are trial collegial judge and justly and their trial power exercise able to OctoberOn 28, law. to according independently Earnestly2013, Opinions on Upholding the Law and Judicial Justice, Improving the People, for “the court’s just and independent exercise of of exercise independent and just “the court’s the of the guidance must be under trial power October On 25, partycommunist leadership.” of Deepening Judicial Program Pilot The 2013, was Power Trial and Reforming Transparency ensuring the sole that which called for issued, 4

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 5 Regulations of Party and Government Party Government of and Regulations Support Judiciary to Independence. Leaders’ party no that demands clearly directive The officials should use their or government become to or influence position, power political consultative conference, lawyers, and lawyers, conference, consultative political scholars. should not the political-judicial committee individual cases. in the handling of interfere is against the constitutional Such interference and is of trial independence requirement that proven have cases Many unnecessary. in prejudice, often results such interference a become even and sometimes such entities Interferencein individual the case. to “party” seeking profit and cases can easily encourage in wrongly often which corruption, results severely that cases misjudged and prosecuted of the partydamage the reputation and as the public confidence as well government In 2013, the three December in the judiciary. province: Jiangxi of organizations provincial Party Disciplinarythe provincial Committee, and the Committee, the Party Organization issued jointly Committee, Political-Judicial should only decide on procedural matters in in matters decide on procedural should only requirements. with Constitutional accordance a judicial “establishing Decision proposes The reflects that system management officials courtThe and characteristics.” professional process will adopt a unified procuratorate appointment, training, the recruitment, for of new judges and promotion relocation, will select and legal lawyers and procurators; procurators; and judges become to scholars for requirements job different up set will the gradual and for position levels, different of judges and procurators; progression career will establish a selection and disciplinary with and procurators judges for committee the participation public figures. of prominent levels of three A unified judicial committee a priority be considered composed could members of the delegates, of congress 4. The local communist party, government, and and government, party, local communist The 4. committee in the judicial system. The The in the judicial system. committee Congress of the People’s Committee Standing budget should be implemented. budget should be implemented. and discipline of judicial officials promotion, established specially a by handled be should local courts and procuratorates at various various at local courts and procuratorates budget, provincial the by borne be shall levels certainwith the by proportionsguaranteed only be a could This government. central financing In the future, measure. transitional the judiciary government the central through in judicial matters remains to be seen. to remains in judicial matters government. the budget of the central from for funding Decision,the the to According framework, which is the fundamental way to to way framework, which is the fundamental authorities. local by interference eliminate on the is silent Decision, however, The of judicial officials and removal appointment this Whether Congress. local People’s by interference local for room omission will leave proposal has already been scheduled on the been scheduled on the has already proposal People’s agenda of the National legislative reducing local In final analysis, the Congress. in judicial personnel matters interference the Constitutional to a revision will involve Committee of the People’s Congress of the of the Congress of the People’s Committee a change in the process Therefore same level. of judges and removal the appointment for the of provision the violate directly not does on Judges and only the Laws Constitution, amendment The be amended. need to would judges mainly relies on Article judges mainly relies 11 of the Law court the of justice chief the i.e. Judges, on the People’s by shall be elected or removed judges shall and level, of the same Congress the Standing by or removed be appointed system, and not through an arrangement an arrangement through and not system, the Although local government. with the local courts that at provides Constitution the state to accountable are various levels court, establishes the that organ the power for system and removal appointment current 3. The selection, appointment, removal, removal, selection, The appointment, 3. 2. The funding for the judiciary should come judiciary the come should for funding The 2. be expanded to also cover abstract abstract also cover to be expanded and making acts laws (i.e. administrative Decision the mentioned The regulations). reform, law deepening of administrative the strengthening of with the intention administrative of powers enforcement oversight not emphasize But it did law. and it enforcement, law of administrative judicial overall the clarify not did especially acts. in Hopefully of administrative review courts law could administrative the future, the function of judicial exercise gradually requirement the Decision’s and realize review, the authority of the “safeguarding of and the law.” Constitution could be tried in another, or higher, or higher, tried be in another, could paid should be attention jurisdiction. Finally, separated” “appropriately words key the to judicial division and administrative between division can be this jurisdiction. Creating must be based any decision difficult because on actual it more needs and should not make the parties. for Division should inconvenient “separation” the sake of for not be done only or “regrouping.” supreme a (1) levels: three at be can law court Supreme the law within administrative Court; law (2) preliminary administrative courts; administrative (3) appellate and from separated courts, which are law divisions. administrative geographical should cases administrative of scope The people were still claiming that RTL still claiming that had had some people were even some officials and effects and many positive needed practice the that thought scholars legal but not abolished altogether. be reformed to the “abolish stated: clearly Decision the Yet ii. Abolishing the Practice of Re- of Practice Abolishing the ii. education Through Labor re-education “abolishing In of 2012 mention sensitive. (RTL) still quite was labor” through of a lot of in the first half of 2013, quite Even 6. Setting up a special court for administrative administrative court special a up for Setting 6. regions, and cases that may be erroneously be erroneously may and cases that regions, local influence decided because of improper certain basic level courts can be merged, certain courts basic level can be merged, courtsas basic used be existing or could established newly a of tribunals dispatch civil cases, law court. administrative Fourth, different cover cases that and commercial superior court could be established and superior court be established and could and Beijing, Hebei, jurisdiction over exercise depending on case volume, Second, Tianjin. in courts located certain are that intermediate can be merged. areas geographical adjacent also depending on case volume, Third, they make the “de facto final decision” and and facto decision” final “de the make they In court cases. many for the final forum are of the banking system reform regrouping, upon as an be looked could the regions of one instance, . For reference for example resources; and increasing judicial efficiency. judicial efficiency. and increasing resources; and their Courts regrouped, should be the to jurisdictions according redefined as demographic as well of cases, volume priority First, transportation and conditions. superior courts to because should be given reduce local interference. Factors to be be to Factors local interference. reduce include: design specific the for considered local partyweakening and government parties for makinginfluence; it convenient bring legal actions;to fully utilizing judicial appropriately separated from the the from separated appropriately should be explored, division administrative overlap the horizontal through break so as to of judicial jurisdictions and administrative would barrier a that create to and divisions government interference in judicial functions interference government and should be clearly defined in legislation specific through implemented effectively measures. systematic involved or interfere in the adjudication and and adjudication in the or interfere involved who are and those cases, of enforcement held shall be of this directive in violation to is conducive directive The accountable. judicial for environment a favorable creating non-party or However, independence. 5. The establishment of judicial jurisdictions of judicial jurisdictions establishment The 5. 6

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 7 the accused’s participation in testimony and participation and in testimony the accused’s and counsel, the right to evidentiary review, acts be illegal could Trivial appeal. to right the with public security measures. discipline treated Other with security illegal acts be treated could forward. The key is to carry out systematic carry key is to The out systematic forward. cage.” in a restrained put power “to reform the paid to be needs to close attention Hence, illegal activities for arrangements follow-up of abolition The correction. community and as to referred remolding, and education custody should be on the agenda for “ bigger RTL,” the discussion as soon as possible. not criminals who are offenders Repeated in compulsoryinclude those who are substance “education those in and abuse rehabilitation Any programs.” and remolding custody through must be freedom physical restriction of a person’s international with relevant done in compliance is to That domestic laws. and China’s treaties must of personal freedom the deprivation say, strict and procedures. go through legal scrutiny correction on administrative if a law Therefore, it must be based of illegal acts be drafted, is to even on the principlesprocess, of basic due be streamlined. could though some procedures should of the legislation key elements The open process, include: judicial determinations, stopped in most localities. In September 2013, 2013, In September localities. most in stopped all RTL inmates. released Province Guangdong of the Decision, Shanghai also the issuance After under RTL. all detainees the since But released Political- Central 2013, when the of beginning the temporary announced Committee Legal of punishment suspension of RTL, other forms of so-called Prosecution emerge. began to “crime the such as increased, crimes” “pocket of illegal “crime and the of trouble-making” detention Administrative business operation.” “Custody also increased. and criminal detention People still exists. and remolding” education transferred were Yanghui and Hongfei Wu like administrative to detention criminal from wisdom” “practical the which showed detention, taking agencies of advantage of enforcement these events, Given gaps in the legal system. only an initial step abolition of RTL represents rule of law. 2013, the practicewas in March Beginning using it as a tool for “maintaining stability” stability” “maintaining for using it as a tool higher petitions to citizens’ suppressing through of speech. freedom authorities and suppressing the received warmly have therefore people Many it as the most major abolition of RTL, regarding the achieving toward years recent in milestone with higher status such as the Constitution, the the Constitution, the as such status higher with of Administrative and the Law of Legislation, Law practice also runs against the The Discipline. to human rights Conventions international In the local practice, which China is a signatory. party abused RTL, frequently and government The RTL practice could deprive a citizen of their of their a citizen RTL deprive The practice could without legal liberty years a maximum of four for re-ordered be and could repeatedly. due process, laws practice is in overt of several The violation recent high impact cases were the final catalyst catalyst the final impact high cases were recent Hui case of Tang abolition, especially the for 2012 and the series of RTL cases in Chongqing Xie Hong, City: Peng those of Ren Jianyu, and Yuequan, Dai Chengcheng, Huang Suming, Hong. Fang at “eliminating counterrevolutionaries.” “eliminating at counterrevolutionaries.” advocated people have many years many For of wall” “solid the down tearing for vigorously Several RTL. their lives. paid with Some even takes effect. But once abolition is effective, is effective, abolition But once takes effect. people serving in RTL will under the past law time period of and the remaining be released, of after 56 years Thus, labor will not be enforced. ended the RTL Committee practice the Standing aimed and in 1957 introduced was that program proposal submitted by the State Council on on Council the State by submitted proposal re-educationabolishing the labor practice, announcing the officially a decree promulgating current decree, the to RTL. of abolition According the abolition until valid still RTL are verdicts system of re-education through labor, improve improve of re-educationsystem labor, through regarding and correction laws punishment the criminalillegal and acts, and strengthen 28, December On community correction system.” National the of Committee Standing the 2013, the and approved reviewed Congress People’s that can be heard, can be heard, that involving lawsuits against administrative acts acts against administrative lawsuits involving emphasized government; level of the county strict to procedure adjudication adherence of the court; and defined the responsibility clarification rules through evidence improved failure of a defendant’s of the consequences the scope of administrative litigation and lists the litigation of administrative the scope acts specific administrative regarding disputes which include administrative rights and use rights of natural ownership rights of land contract such as land, resources and minimum areas, in rural and management security livelihood benefit issues. Other changes a specific include: during a challenge to the made at act, can be requests administrative regulatory that documents review same time to of rules and level the classification below are complaints” “verbal for permission regulations; litigation; in administrative and mediation and third representative established litigation party clarified status; the standing of the plaintiff of standing the limiting and defendant, and in a legal interest those who have to plaintiffs act; improved an administrative litigated the and hierarchical of geographical standard jurisdiction, the superior specifying that of adjudication initial the court authorize can level cases of basic litigation administrative and region, courts outside the administrative court cases the intermediate can adjudicate that Congress for review. Public comments were were comments Public review. for Congress and January 31, 2013, December on solicited of the is the first major revision This 31, 2014. in October its implementation 1990. since law an important deal was to revision measure The of in the operation problem with an urgent a claim, file to “hard litigation: administrative the tryto enforce to hard the claim and hard outcome.” Articles, new 23 added Draft Revision The 4, making 36, and deleted revised important litigation, administrative of the scope changes to parties,the standing of case jurisdiction, and of limitation, statutes acceptance, evidence Draft RevisionThe clearly measures. enforcement agencies cannot administrative establishes that or obstructinterfere the court in the handling Draft Revision The expands cases. administrative Administrative Litigation Law was submitted to to submitted was Law Litigation Administrative People’s National the of Committee Standing the Law should be drafted soon as well. Law the of Revision Major First The iii. Administrative Litigation Law the of Draft Revision The In2013 December integrated community correction system should should community correction system integrated with agency, the judicial administrative be led by The the active participation of social groups. and defined, be people should targeted of scope Correction A Community their rights protected. apply this experience according to China’s China’s to according apply this experience the individual correction instance, For context. the correction consultation model of Australia, and model of minors in the Netherlands, the self-governing model of well-developed The be considered. could in the U.S. communities and volunteers, as well as low awareness and and awareness low as as well and volunteers, community toward of the public initiatives of level this low to correction all contribute should in this regard work future The quality. but of some countries the experience look at strong traditions of criminal punishment, low low of criminal punishment, traditions strong not enough of community development, levels agencies, support judicial administrative from justice grassroots the for guidance enough not organizations, of civic weak development offices, lack of willing participation of organizations after the issuance of the Opinion of Nationwide of Nationwide of the Opinion after issuance the become have Work, Trial Correction Community the various factors, But due to widespread. quality of community correction is overall frames, Inadequate system low. relatively this practice should be fully debated. this practice should be fully debated. has already community correction system The be some practical and needs to experience programs, Pilot further. and improved developed first startedcertain in in 2003, and in 2009 areas measures and as misdemeanors as practiced as practiced misdemeanors and as measures punishment elevating But countries. in many elevating means misdemeanor a of level the to in change This a criminal. to a petty offender human basic affects a person’s classification adopt to whether question as to so the rights, 8

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 9 The Regulation has had some positive impact: impact: positive had some has Regulation The quality case-handling the of emphasizing and a case; reiterating for accountability lifelong and when in doubt” “acquit the principles of helpful correctives of innocence”; “presumption which put specific checks on the stages of of stages the on checks specific put which The and trial. prosecution, investigation, include: simultaneous audio measures process of the entire and video recording during the investigation; of interrogation that and excluding submitting all evidence strict to adherence which should be excluded; when and evidence to according adjudication practicing acquittal; strictin doubt, evidence or verdicts no unlawful standards; verification like decisions because of external pressures petitions, grievance dramatic media hype, local “maintaining or deadlines,” time “detection rights stability”;lawyers’ protecting effectively the law; practice improving and to establishing system and responsibility power integrated officer and police prosecutor, the judge, where for responsibility/accountability a lifelong have a clear handling; having the quality of a case’s and the definition of miscarriage cases, of justice partyinitiating of correction, and and process measures. accountability to promote judicial transparency and the transparency judicial the and promote to miscarriage of cases. of justice rehabilitation In 2013, the Deputy May of the Chief Justice should “We Court said: Supreme Shen Deyong miscarriage against cases like of justice guard beasts, savage floods and fierce against guarding a guilty person than release rather would we i.e. unjust several Thus person.” an innocent convict overturned, were years cases spanning many family uncle and nephew casesuch as the Zhang in case Chagnlong Wu the province, Zhejiang in Henan in case Huailiang Li the province, Fujian in Zhejiang. case and the Xiao Shan province, serious major cases raising a few quite Currently, or re-trial. under review doubts are Political-Judicial 2013, the Central In August Regulation on Earnestly The issued Committee Miscarriage Cases of Justice Preventing in each and every case.” Since Zhou Qiang Zhou Qiang Since in each and every case.” Supreme the of Justice Chief new the became efforts Courthe has made great 2013, in March of false charges, wrongly prosecuted and and prosecuted wrongly of false charges, again highlighted was cases misjudged of justice “miscarriage as to referred (hereinafter leadership aimed to high level The cases”). and fairness “let justice the people experience iv. Further Preventing Miscarriage of Miscarriage of Preventing Further iv. Justice Cases of the newly In 2013 against the background the prevention Law, Criminal Procedure revised become law is uncertain. In the final analysis, is uncertain. law become In the final analysis, can only litigation the defects of administrative especially by judicial reform, by be remedied which furtherenhancing judicial independence, of the political system. reform involves jurisdiction, the Supreme Court can set up jurisdiction, Court the Supreme can set up tribunals with judges administrative circuit establishing and eventually periodically, rotating the Draft court. Also, a special administrative many and just how Revisionis still under review, survive could and provisions of its progressive For instance, the scope of cases to be heard heard be to cases of scope the instance, For be furthercould include more extended to review. judicial acts for abstract administrative On the basis of enhancing jurisdiction level of geographical the choices and expanding procuratorate over administrative litigation. litigation. administrative over procuratorate progress Draft RevisionThe substantive made of standing litigation, of scope the of terms in but measures, the parties, and enforcement improvement. for room significant still is there of an administrative agency’s refusal and failure failure and refusal agency’s an administrative of or mediation a judicial decision, verdict, obey to of the and authorizing detention agreement, agency directly administrative an of personnel trial and specified a refusal; such for responsible supervision supervision and strengthened of the to provide evidence within the time limits, the the time limits, within the evidence provide to the application the plaintiff, of of proof burden responsibility the defendant’s rules, of evidence and the court subpoena evidence, providing for measures function; enforcement strengthened authorizing the courtby record make a public to to the law, and no organization or individual can and no organization the law, to pretense. under any interfere wide Nie of attracted case has which Shubin, The of the government’s is a touchstone attention, correcting and preventing sinceritytowards ensure the correction of all mistakes. Therefore, Therefore, the correction of all mistakes. ensure of miscarriage cases of justice the prevention “acquit as such concepts require only not does innocence, of presumption the doubt,” in when it evidence, of unlawful and the exclusion supportingalso requires mechanisms such as simultaneous presence, ensuring the lawyer’s testimonials, witness audio and video recording, the testimonials, and presence officer’s the police decrees, judicial confessions, of substantiation jurisdiction supervisions, judicial accountability, the Furthermore, and case quality control. of the miscarriage requires of justice prevention the legal system, changes to fundamental remain the right to citizens such as giving practice of lawyers’ guarantees effective silent, and the power, the reduction in police rights, power, of police of the oversight strengthening of the procuratorate’s repositioning proper supervisorya from power a restraining to role of function, trial and the independent power the court the judge only acts where according evidence, the importance of court hearings, the importance of courtevidence, hearings, tribunal rules, of evidence strict enforcement presiding and the responsibility, joint members’ primary responsibility/accountability judge’s above- The handling. case of quality control for measures concrete are directives two mentioned of the Central Regulation The implement to more are They Committee. Political-Judicial certainpractical play in preventing and will roles handled cases. wrongly progress has been some there Although above-mentioned the of issuance the since cause of root the and directives, regulations the miscarriage cases is far from of justice is capable that long as the system As addressed. i.e. such cases is not changed, of producing and the without clear judicial accountability to it is hard judicial independence, requisite in the investigation authorized in in authorized in the investigation Opinions required a change to the “confessions “confessions the a change to Opinions required of the scrutiny stressing practice, supremacy” issued Certain Opinions on Preventing Criminal Criminal issued Certain Opinions on Preventing which emphasized Miscarriage Cases, of Justice protection and for respect concepts: basic five of trial exercise of human rights; independent open the law; to due process; according powers Certain evidence. trials; by and adjudication major and complicated homicide cases, and and homicide cases, major and complicated surveying; site in crime scene involvement responsibility/ and establishing a lifelong handling prosecutors’ over system accountability Court 2013, the Supreme In November of a case. Justice Cases. It emphasized the following: the the It the following: emphasized Cases. Justice of prosecutorial and just exercise independent meet rights to lawyers’ guaranteeing power; especially in significant with the accused, bribery strictest evidentiary the applying cases; procutary cases; sentence in death standards consultation Supreme Court and Supreme Procuratorate Court Procuratorate Supreme and Supreme prevent to measures also issued concrete In miscarriage September 2013, cases. of justice issued Certain Procuratorate the Supreme Prosecutorial Performing Opinions on Properly Miscarriage and Correct of Prevent to Functions lasting effect. Their limited effect will be diluted be diluted effect will Their limited lasting effect. of the high- in practice as the focus or shelved leadership shifts. level Regulation, the The implement In to order “in general” the local political-judicial committee political-judicial committee the local general” “in the nature its opinion about should not express for room which leaves case, and handling of a for tone” of the “setting and the interference of this certain Regulations or directives cases. with kind legislation not institutionalized are practice of “joint handling of cases” by various various by handling of cases” “joint practice of of under the coordination judicial agencies which committee, the local political-judicial and trial prosecutorial to is not conducive that states Regulation The And independence. to some incorrect concepts, such as presumption presumption as such concepts, incorrect some to one-sided the and rate the of guilt, of pursuit and verdict. prosecution, detection,of arrest, certainare in some defects there However, The instance, For Regulation. The of measures and supports the current Regulation recognizes 10

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 11 the Internet is a purely public space. This is in is in This public space. the Internet is a purely on provisions of the legislative clear violation criminal acts the applicable scope and expanded and causing a fights “picking the crime of for disturbance.” Interpretation intensified “Internet fear” and and “Internet fear” intensified Interpretation case “thefirst soon, Very criticism. of lot a drew criminal detention” to of 500 people transferred Hui, Yan the Interpretation. defects in exposed in Zhangjiachuan a middle school student criminal under put was Gansu province city, blog he cast because in his micro detention the unusual death doubt about a case regarding quickly case was This quashed because of a man. was Hui Yang reaction. social strong the of security public local of head the and released for investigated was Yongqiang, Bai bureau, bribes. accepting “Supreme” In fact of the two the Interpretation low extremely an set only not organs state of serious defamation,” “crime the for threshold of actionable the scope but also expanded legislative existing beyond defamation circumstances seven listed it is, That provisions. “seriously as be considered could that This interest.” and state social order damaging “online crime, new a created even Interpretation that implying a presumption trouble-making,” methods to obtain short-term to methods benefit is bound reported Many cases clearly be problematic. to overreaction such by created the flaws revealed Ms. instance, For punishment. and improper because detained was province Zhao in Hebei “whether someone died in the she asked was province Guangdong Zhang in Mr. case”; martyrs“the five of he said detained because police The guerrillas.” Mountain were Ya Liang because Heyu Yu arrested Anhui, Tangshan, in said 16 and he a car accident 10 people died in Hubei, an internet in Shiyan, people died; and he reported detained because user was 7 people when actually died in a car accident only 3 died. support the in September 2013, drive, this To Procuratorate Court Supreme and Supreme on issued a rushed judicial interpretation jointly Involving in Criminal Cases of Laws Application This Defamation. Network for Information Using Xue Manzi was exposed on China Central TV on China Central Manzi exposed was Xue kindThis of politically visiting prostitutes. for using improper drive” “justice motivated were arrested and put under criminal detention and put under criminal detention arrested were detention. put under administrative and 90 were Huohuo, Qin like Internet figures Prominent reportera Hu, Lu and Xuesheng Fu Lubao, Zhou detained. were Newspaper, of the New Fast Censorship has increased since the “Southern “Southern the since increased has Censorship in early incident 2013. In newspaper Weekend” on Internet rumors 2013 a crackdown August 31 , in August 20 to August China. From swept 5 people alone, in Hubei province one place file, and if qualified, the court the qualified, if and startshould file, the process. retrial Judicial of and Reform Reflection v. Interpretations were consistent with the crime scene and similar similar and crimethe with scene consistent were crimes. him in other used by methods were when even weak, was evidence the Because case Nie’s culprit captured, no real was there most The law. to according should be reviewed see the let the lawyer is to now concern urgent could not be excluded. Discrepancies between between Discrepancies not be excluded. could common. are and evidence a confession appeared initial confession Wang’s Moreover, of outside influence. without indication natural, confession Wang’s importantMany in details was sentenced to death in the second trial. trial. in the second death to sentenced was door for the that public concern triggered This about the mishandled Nie’s finding the truth though Even tighter. be closed even case would confession, Wang’s in discrepancies were there the murderer was Wang the possibility that mother of Nie Shubin cried out for help. The The mother of Nie help. Shubin cried out for case in of Nie’s a retrial CourtSupreme ordered and the lawyer 2007. It years, been seven has to still not been permitted of the petitioner has Shujin Wang In 2013, September the file. read the miscarriage of justice. In 1995, Niethe miscarriage of justice. Shubin, by death to sentenced was old, years then 21 and Superior rape Court for Provincial the Hebei In murderer, 2005 the real homicide. intentional to and confessed captured Shujin, was Wang and killingThe raping the victim, Kang Juhua. the provincial and prefecture levels as well as at as at as well levels and prefecture the provincial juvenile where procuratorates, level basic the the of Some exploration criminalabound. cases in Shanghai example, For is valuable. local level sealing record criminal juvenile a Tianjin, and legislative interpretation while reducing the the while reducing interpretation legislative Fifth, judicial interpretation. giving necessity for law- judicial organs’ abolishing the eventually making and authority judicial through powers interpretation. Juvenile Justice the Improving vi. System system justice of the juvenile improvement The pilot of judicial reform has been a key element In 2013, the local level. especially at programs, Court the number of the Supreme increased case trial tribunals, juvenile comprehensive 49 pilot intermediate begun in 2006, to of 2014, the the beginning courts. At level on Regulation a issued Procuratorate Supreme Cases, Criminal Juvenile Handling Procuratorate’s for procedures specific further which improved that cases and emphasized handling juvenile criminal procuratorate juvenile an independent at should be established in the procuratorates and timely correction and elimination of those those of elimination and correction timely and of the in violation are that interpretations unifying the Second, laws. and Constitution authorityjudicial interpretation; of forms and judicial of quicklypower the discontinuing and procuraterate, the by interpretation reserving judicial interpretation sole authority for a guiding actively promoting Third, court. the to guiding more publishing system: case precedent courts encouraging at greatly case precedents; documents verdict make their to various levels of public; trying the application interpret to meaningful case through procedures and laws the necessity of and reducing precedents, judicial interpretations. making through law of Committee Standing the to proposing Fourth, the setting up a Congress People’s the National ensure to interpretation judicial for unit special and workable and increase scientific legislation Article 41 of the Constitution Article 41 of the Constitution

procedures for formulating and promulgating promulgating and formulating for procedures establishing a judicial judicial interpretation; mechanism, and removal review interpretation adopt the following ideas. First, enacting enacting First, ideas. adopt the following as quickly of Judicial Interpretation a Law chapter special a creating or possible, as of in the Law on Judicial Interpretation strict to with special regard Legislation, interpretations, confusion about the forms, about the forms, confusion interpretations, and the of procedure, simplified formulations and revocation for mechanisms of absence oversight. could of judicial interpretation reform Future interpretation is to provide remedies for general general for remedies provide is to interpretation judges’ for provisions, legislative and vague the lack of case precedents, and for inadequacy, system a long time the judicial interpretation for vires of ultra ridden in China was with problems multiple authorities undertakinginterpretation, serious than the mere rumors themselves. rumors themselves. serious than the mere for need urgent the shows example This current the reforming then and reflection with Chinese “judicial interpretation of system the purpose Although of judicial characteristics.” not in an exaggerated and political way. Violating Violating and political way. not in an exaggerated the interpretation expanding legal definitions, of actionable and using the crime defamation, of picking to causing a disturbance and fights abuse Internetwanton the on a is rumors punish more far is harm whose power, government of by law includes the freedom of improper improper of freedom the includes law by clear punishable through speech, which is only and should not be limited provisions legislative a judicial interpretation. by criminalized or even on but any down Rumors should be cracked and law, to must be done according crackdown its staff). The Interpretation therefore could its staff). could therefore Interpretation The Article to 41 of According be unconstitutional. and Articlethe Constitution on of the Law 90 the National petition to can citizens Legislation, the legality of the review to Congress People’s of speech protected Freedom Interpretation. The Interpretation weakened Article 35 of Article weakened Interpretation 35 of The of freedom citizens’ on the Constitution and speech, make (to right of overseeing on the citizens’ accusations, petitions, suggestions, criticisms, and and criminal reports organ a state about 12

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 13 are minors, and the revision of the relevant relevant of the the revision and minors, are instance, For names of crimes in the penal code. with minor of sleeping “crime abolishing the would the crime of rape it to and changing girls” with a girl intercourse having make it clear that rape of crime a is fourteen of age the under more, or years five of imprisonment subject to penalty. the death and in serious cases, first” principle has been articulated. The Opinion, principle has been articulated. first” female of assault sexual that stated clearly and the assault,” campus sexual “school minors, prostitution minors into forcing and organizing Opinion The punished. severely should be behavior obscene for punishment that stated should such as the classroom in public places Opinion also emphasized The be increased. regarding of information the confidentiality crime prevent victims minors so as to who are the Opinion Thus the minor. to harm” “secondary net. protection established a three-layer possible in the further are improvements There These victims minors. who are regarding law minor victims, legal legal aid to providing are: appearing in court on behalf representatives civil compensation increasing of the minor, crime victims for who compensation and state the first time in China’s laws for the protection the protection for laws the first time in China’s of the child comes “interest an of minors that October Court, 2013, the Supreme the Supreme the Ministry Security, of Public Procuratorate, and the Ministry issued an jointly of Justice Crimes of Sexual Assault Opinion on Punishing represents Opinion The Law. to Minors According community correction and assistance system. system. community correction and assistance crime victimsJuvenile also deserve full attention Inand protection. courtthe 2013, March in Beijing seal video images for first tried to of minor victimsthe protection In of crimes. be hastened, such as social surveys of juvenile such as social surveys of juvenile be hastened, for follow-up and educational criminal cases, not arrested criminal suspectsjuvenile who were should be implemented These or prosecuted. improved increasingly the with together the separation of the prosecutions of a crime of a crime of the prosecutions the separation non- offenders; multiple juvenile by committed offenders; juvenile for risk evaluations custody of a or expungement sealing and conditional Other misdemeanor criminal record. juvenile’s should and reform aspects of pilot programs maturing and becoming ready to be enacted to in ready maturing and becoming presence practicesthe include: These legislation. adults at or appropriate of legal guardians criminal handling of juvenile trial; expedited cases; of criminal cases; mediation juvenile allowing the presence of certain adults. And in of certain in And presence the adults. allowing court the the intermediate initiated Guangzhou, pre-trialjuvenile judicial conference. joint by and experience exploration years’ many After some practices are various local procuratorates, a Pilot Regulation on Non-Custodial Litigation Litigation Regulation on Non-Custodial a Pilot the In Kunming, Criminal Cases. of Juvenile court level prison trying is intermediate avoid to at all possible. if offenders juvenile for sentences court level is In the intermediate Chendu, system has been fully implemented. Beijing Beijing fully implemented. has been system court the first superiorestablished juvenile level a trial has trial tribunalprocuratorate and the of certain In project of no prosecution cases. public security the department, Henan province, and the court issued jointly the procuratorate, accountability, oversight, and legal protection. and legal protection. oversight, accountability, can realized is independence judicial when Only the fullest to be eliminated judicial corruption re-established. extent and judicial credibility coming years is referred to as“Zhou Qiang’s first first Qiang’s as“Zhou to referred is years coming directive.” six ways the following: Opinions proposed The of making judiciarythe serve four the people, for measures four justice, ensure to initiatives and six ideas enhancing judicial credibility, enhancing for measures The courtfor reform. justice, included increasing judicial credibility of role the practice, democratic transparency, capacity the and lawyers, and jurors people’s building of legal professionals. on which judicial is the premise Justice and seen be must justice and rests credibility and only then can the the public, by experienced above-The crisisjudicial credibility be defused. this approach, reflected measures mentioned China’s in emphasis an been also has which ReportsJudicial Reform years. in recent depends on judicial Judicial credibility judicial by supplemented independence, credibility. In October Court 2013, the Supreme credibility. Earnestlyon Opinions entitled directive a issued Improving the People, for Upholding the Law and Enhancing Judicial Judicial Justice, which document programmatic The Credibility. court the of in reform and work the guide will cases. In April 2013, the Supreme Court held In Court Aprilcases. 2013, the Supreme held expertslegal a judicial enhancing on seminar After Zhou Qiang became Chief Justice Justice Chief became Qiang Zhou After Courtof the Supreme in 2013, he focused through on enhancing judicial credibility handled transparency and correcting wrongly general. general. it is partissue; is not a separate the of This of system entire the of credibility of low problem which reflects crisis a credibility public authority, in society as a whole. The issue that could be as disturbing as injustice be as disturbing as injustice could issue that The be just to is not believed that is a just verdict crisis is of judicial credibility This the people. by not only to a serious challenge in China today, in social governance but also to judicial reform as well as improving case evaluation, guiding guiding case evaluation, as improving as well and mechanisms, enforcement case precedents, compensation. government (I) Enhancing Judicial Credibility Specific measures included: promoting judicial judicial included: promoting Specific measures harmonizing style, work improving transparency, judges and lawyers, between the relationship pilot launching capacity building, strengthening trial panel and juryprojects of a collegial system, The major reform of the court system in 2013 of the court in 2013 system major reform The public of the enhancement around centered of trial power, exercise the better credibility, courtof and the optimization functions. II. Reform Measures in the Court System the Court System Measures in II. Reform 14

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 15 Boxilai case had a demonstrative effect and set effect and set case had a demonstrative Boxilai courts of transparency a good example for all at the case of Boxilai, the case of Wang Shujin Shujin Wang the case of the case of Boxilai, the case in Nanjing where in Hebei province, starved and death, to were girls young two girl a baby Beijing where in Daxing, case the Especially ground. the to smashed fatally was with the much-observed the Bo Xilai case, which micro-blogged triallive, was entire degree The became the biggest highlight. sharp-The surprising. of transparency was on both sides of arguments exchange tongued that indicated confrontation and the intense In the show. pre-rehearsed a not was trial the image and poor of the court’s circumstances of practice trial this credibility, judicial low Court overwhelming Jinan Intermediate won the Although commendation. and approval to not allowed media were public and news of transparency went the degree observe freely, that showed This expectations. far beyond be judicial transparency is not something to enhance of; it can greatly afraid on the contrary, trial open of the The of the court.the credibility of China’s Verdict Documents was officially officially was Documents Verdict of China’s to According published. verdicts and launched, cases that penalty death review this Measure, verdicts and regular guiding significance have the Internet, be published on usually would cases of civil and commercial verdicts whereas of withdrawal mediation, through resolved the complaint as cases treated (or complaints usually not be published would withdrawn) was it if publicize not to apply can Parties online. privacy personal or involve deemed to was shall receive information Personal secrets. trade the public for when made treatment technical show initiatives above The of parties.protection toward progress has been substantive there that the full transparency of verdicts. high profile 2013 the trialsIn of several August e.g., the public, to live broadcast cases were

2 2.For more details see “Nine Suggestions for Enhancing Judicial Credibility.” Study and Exploration, Vol. 1, 2014 Study and Exploration, Vol. 2.For more details see “Nine Suggestions for Enhancing Judicial Credibility.” Judicial transparency made new progress in in Judicial transparency made new progress Court issued People’s In Supreme the 2013. July the of Publication Online of Measures Interim and the website Verdicts, Court’s Supreme Documents on the Internet, and Provisions of of Documents on the Internet, and Provisions Broadcast Taped and Live Court’s the People’s of open and demonstrative scope The Trials. of courts and the online publication has expanded, continued. of verdicts Regulation of Judicial Transparency, Certain Certain Transparency, Regulation of Judicial Handling Court’s of the People’s Provisions of Opinion, Standards of Media and Public Courts, Provisions Open and Demonstrative Verdict of Publication Court’s of the People’s Judicial transparency has been a major initiative Judicial transparency has been a major initiative in recent reform of judicial and achievement of judicial reforms the last round Since years. been have directives launched in 2008, several They promulgated. include: The Six-Point mechanism; 8. establishing enforcement units units mechanism; 8. establishing enforcement of the court; more independent 9. introducing practices such as a true jurydemocratic system. Transparency i. Promoting Judicial program of suggestions was made: 1. reducing reducing made: 1. of suggestions was program local authorities; 2. reducing by the interference distinct 3. interference; judicial administrative accountability; judges; job security 4. better for judicial 6. more judicial oversight; 5. appropriate transparency; the guiding case up 7. speeding The main objective of judicial reform is now to to is now main objective of judicial reform The and let the people judicial credibility enhance and fairness in each case. justice experience 9-point feasible more thinking,a this on Based Considering the great difficulties in realizing in realizing difficulties the great Considering carrying and independence judicial out situation, in the current reforms legal substantive try to be would practical to approach a more credibility and independence judicial increase possible. wherever required that that required : whereas trials of insignificant cases are broadcast broadcast are cases insignificant trials of whereas some courts in the fairness live; lack confidence and the promptness and quality of their verdicts, place. to place from varies greatly of publication judicial reform. judicial reform. provided documents normative above The years, In the past few measures. concrete feasible judicial transparency has made considerable trial from basically advancing progress, transparency, comprehensive transparency to combined transparency to procedural from and results, and procedure of transparency of the court power the implementing from to right the and sue to right the protecting to in a democracy. as required open information on the actual next will be focusing The step of rules and regulations. implementation real go for to is still a long way There For of judicial transparency. implementation restrictions on many still too are there instance, the observation especially the so-called of trials, transparency cases; sometimes is “sensitive” that cases profile high on information selective: is kept strictly public concern secret, broad have implementation of major enforcement cases; cases; of major enforcement implementation making who lost their the list of people public the leaving restricted from are credibility, consumption restricted for and are country, and system social credit boost the so as to limit, open information. overall enhance on Verdicts Courts’ of Publicizing Provisions the Internet publishing principles set as“legal, truthful” and normative, timely, unit special a courtsdesignate each level at exceptions four listed publication; verdict for names real that non-publishing; stipulated for be used when publishing, should and entities and of anonymous the scope and delineated has verdicts Publishing information. deleted 80% If in the next years, five significance. great published of courts are of verdicts all levels at to contribution it will make a great online, enquiry system; conducting synchronized enquiryconducting synchronized system; of hearings and audio and video recording the rule and non-publishing an exception. No No the rule and non-publishing an exception. and obstruction is allowed, the publication to of the all verdicts have goal is to the ultimate court there. in China published four-tier system information the enforcement improving Third, trial and hearing, panel discussion, and verdict and verdict panel discussion, trial and hearing, of this purpose the website For and sentencing. officially court was broadcasts trial live China’s building 2013. Second, launched in December Court of China’s the website and improving is a case verdict publishing where Verdicts Several initiatives have been undertaken to undertaken been have to initiatives Several platforms. the building of the three implement technology data was using information first The court of case filing, publish the procedure to the public; and change from transparency in transparency in the public; and change from three The transparency in substance”. to form transparency transparency were for platforms verdict of transparency procedure, trial of and transparency of enforcement documents, information. Building Three Platforms of Judicial Transparency, Transparency, of Judicial Platforms Three Building Courts’ People’s of Publicizing and Provisions The issued. on the Internet were Verdicts passive change from emphasized“to directives activetransparency transparency; to change to transparency to transparency internal from improve rational explanation of legal documents, legal documents, of explanation rational improve the court verdicts and encourage publicize to Court its launched Supreme The force”. in 21, 2013 and on on November microblog on Conference held a News 28, it November Documents. of Normative Transparency Judicial Certain Opinions on Conference the News At In November 2013, the Decision made by the the 2013, the Decision made by In November PlenaryThird Session of the 18th Communist to“promote proposed Committee Party Central and record trialprosecution, open open and court the entire hearing and trialretain material; levels and in all localities. From now on, if live live if on, now From localities. all in and levels major video of trial and live at micro-blogging become could public attention draw cases that the improve greatly it would practice, common the court.image of 16

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 17 efforts. Yet it also showed the effectiveness effectiveness the showed also it Yet efforts. of the power and importance of the oversight the Therefore and the public. parties involved but movement, rectification the issue is not key of speech, of freedom the protection rather, Unhealthy Tendencies during Festival Time during Time Tendencies Unhealthy Festival of Conducting Ethical Notice The as as well 2014 for Court in the National Education System issued. were had some effect on curbing directives above The of stubborn resistance, tendencies the unhealthy with “wining and dining” and luxury, laziness, for vehicles and using public public funds, drive” “correction But this kind use. of private effects as the same long-term does not have judicial and Also, mechanisms. institutionalized administrative reinforce specific inspections may court, the higher and the lower links between independence internal to which is not conducive within the court system. involving case prostitution collective The judges of Shanghai Superior Court in August case by ordering” room “private 2013 and the Superior Court judge in a Hubei Provincial above the of limitation the indicated December In March 2013 the national court system held In court 2013 the national held March system In April the an anti-corruption conference. of Conducting Notice The CourtSupreme issued six exposed which Education, Ethics Judicial using public tendencies: types of unhealthy and entertainment, luxury receptions funds for of absence, leave unauthorized ceremonies, lackluster efforts work after holidays, long other entities, to vehicles lending government In personal purposes. May and using them for Court2013, the Supreme launched the second The inspections issued judicial and of round Illegal for Proposal Disciplinary Enforcement and Police of Government and Use Purchase Illegal Business and Profit- and for Vehicles Notice The Making In Activities. June 2013 Return Club Courts Country the to All in to and in December issued, was Membership Cards Rectify to “Ten-Nos” of Provisions The 2013 documents, and briefs, and improving research research and improving and briefs, documents, and survey work. of Further Improving Judicial Ethics. The six six The Ethics. Judicial Improving of Further the principle adhering of to were: measures judicial serving promoting law people, the communication strengthening transparency, meetings, streamlining with the public, by the central government, the court made court the made government, central the by effort. Inmore implement of 2012, to the end Style Work of Improving Provisions Eight The issued with the People Ties Closer and Having Committee, Party Central the Communist by Six Measures Courtthe Supreme promulgated For many years, improving court ethics to court improving ethics to years, many For has been the reiterated judicial integrity ensure in court. year, the of past Over the objective initiated the Rectification to response Movement transparency platforms requires a great deal of of deal great a requires platforms transparency expertise, technology and adequate information courts to in less funding should be provided areas. developed ii. Improving Court Ethics Further, efforts for more open trial hearings, such open trial hearings, for more efforts Further, hearings, appellate as ensuring open trials for rights ensuring litigants’ Fully should be done. also all stages of litigation files at review to of three building The should be implemented. selective publication of information should be be should of information selective publication for openness should be greater there prohibited; live to given cases; and preference high profile blogging. micro than live rather video broadcasts observation of trials should be given Press it. for provided and the conveniences priority, practice throughout the world. Further clarify the Further world. the practice throughout relax publication, of verdict and content scope of and clarify accountability standards, restrictive verdicts so the court not publishing effective for The formality. as a mere publication avoid as to To solve these problems and push further for push further and these problems solve for To initiatives following the transparency, judicial make trial hearings be considered: could public and encourage open completely observation; apart the necessary from security common checking,the ID is as eliminate checks, Huiyang districtHuiyang the security court check relaxed the court enter now can and they lawyers for Bar The Certificate. with their Lawyer’s freely with together in Beijing worked Association Guideline The Beijing superior court and issued for Simplify the Securityto Check Procedure community whose rights to practice according practice according community whose rights to and protected. should be fully respected law to of legal experts the forum at day, following The judicial enhance to how on scholars and out Zhou Qiang pointed Chief Justice credibility, must of the judicial system development that effortsclosely depend on joint of legal scholars and courtslawyers and if and lawyers stand will be a sound legal system sides, on opposite impossible. Court of the Supreme the initiatives Through community and and the efforts of the lawyers’ local courts issued many have agencies, related In May rights. lawyers’ protecting directives court city intermediate in Bayannao’er 2013, at opened was passage Inner green a Mongolia, only needed to lawyers where lawyers, for court the intermediate In July, their ID. show of issued a Notice in Enshi city Hubei province Security Ceasing and Other Check of Lawyers in Court Appear Perform Who to Professionals In Guangdong province, Duties. Huizhou, Legal Lawyers are very active on microblogs. Out Out very are activeLawyers on microblogs. they sense of responsibility, of a professional the often media in challenging use self-created court thus making and judges, relationship the This worse. even groups the two between up the community of the legal tears tension image the judiciary’s and damages profession and credibility. the seriousness problem, of this realized Having Court the Supreme repeatedly in the past year and requested of the lawyer the role stressed judges and between the relationship that the On April 25, 2013, at be improved. lawyers Deputy Chief criminal trial survey seminar, Court, Deyong Shen Supreme the of Justice in preventing of lawyers spoke highly of the role lawyers that He stressed handled cases. wrongly important are professional legal the of members file reviewing and making copies and they are and makingfile reviewing and they are copies in court, interrupted or evicted. often scolded, the court. Sometimes the court imposed harsh “sensitive discriminatory security checks on ID such as repeated cases” “sensitive in lawyers” removal and the forced body searches, checks, difficulties in have Lawyers of shoes and belts. Xing being forcefully evicted from the court evicted from in Xing being forcefully district,Chuanying Jilin city; Zhuxiaoding lawyer in the superior court being evicted sheriffs by undergo to refusing for of Shandong province of case security a river small check; the in and being evicted lawyers from several Guiyang and Li Jinxing going a on hunger strike after strikeand Li Jinxing going a on hunger after district, Yinhai the courtbeing evicted from in Wang lawyer Guangxi province; Beihai city, the courtQuanzhang being detained by in Wang lawyer Jiangsu province; Jingjiang city, legal system and environment, lawyers in general lawyers and environment, legal system Especially in “trouble-makers”. as regarded are judges between the relationship years recent and tense increasingly become has and lawyers confrontational. fiercely in some cases even Jinzhu Yang included lawyers incidents Recent iii. Improving the Relationship between iii. Improving the Relationship between Judges and Lawyers is and lawyers judges between relationship The Under the current in judicial process. the core establishing a disciplinary system for judges judges establishing a disciplinary for system punishment and prevention on focuses that restricting judges’ judges, by of corruption sense of a outside job activities, and promoting ethics among judges. professional efforts needed include: while implementing efforts while implementing needed include: protection, and oversight, judicial accountability, clarifying a independence; enhancing judicial making boundary the of responsibility, judge’s and also accountable; judge independently the encouragement of people’s anti-corruption anti-corruption people’s of encouragement the the parties of the rights of actions,the protection transparency, judicial enhancing the lawyer, and practicing the rule Constitution, the enforcing thus constitutionalism, and democratic of law reform Future “locking in a cage.” powers really 18

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 19

natural continuation continuation natural of Britain and the U.S., has been followed by by has been followed of Britain and the U.S., and thus has as well countries law continental the practice throughout a common become It world. should be an important direction for of the judge selection method. reform China’s As for the practical measures of improving of improving the practical measures for As is an there the judge-lawyer relationship, judge to establish a lawyer need to urgent be helpful for which will system, conversion and respect, tolerance, mutual understanding, Selecting lawyers. and judges between trust is a lawyers judges from Judges with practicing career. of a lawyer’s understand a will better as lawyers experience a lawyer’s tolerate and better behavior lawyer’s deeds or performance and court.words in fierce become who lawyers those future the in Maybe and understand better judges will experience the difficulties of making decision. In a verdict because will trust judges more lawyers this way, experience; similar professional they have because more lawyers trust will judges similarly a judge one day. become one of them may will judge-lawyer the relationship Eventually the judiciary Therefore a virtuousbecome cycle. effortsto select judges from should make great of establish the system and rapidly lawyers This the judge. to the lawyer from conversion countries law in the common originated system, Protecting lawyers’ rights should become a a become should rights lawyers’ Protecting The principle community. of the legal consensus not only are and lawyers prosecutors, judges, in sharing disgrace, honor and interdependent If the justice. of the safeguard they are but also the practicenot guaranteed, right is lawyers’ and entity, will lose an antagonizing prosecutor without Judges out. not come the truth may to bound are and checks and balances oversight right Ifpractice judicial arbitrariness. the lawyers’ the prosecuting practice is not guaranteed, to and cannot be respected and trial power power a can easily become the judge and prosecutor of the safeguarding Therefore, power. for vassal the efforts of rights not only requires lawyers’ judges and prosecutors but also requires lawyers, mission, because it is a take on this common to of a society under the rule of law. basic premise r court in Hebei province issued The The issued r court in Hebei province fundamental action will be to realize judicial judicial actionfundamental realize be to will rights. lawyers’ guarantee fairness and effectively an inch, the lawyer will give a yard. Although Although a yard. will give an inch, the lawyer the court such as no has taken some measures special a or assigning security lawyers checks for radically not will these lawyers, for lounge more The judge-lawyer relationship. improve prosecutors and lawyers only need to show valid valid show only need to and lawyers prosecutors court.to the certificatecoming when the the judge-lawyer relationship, improve To extending by court take the initiative needs to the judge gives When first. branch the olive effective improvement would be to revise revise be to would improvement effective Article 6, Section 1 of the Rules on Security Check of Judicial Officers abolish and to in court appearance to restrictions on lawyers’ making duties, perform it clear that professional Chongqing city began the one-card practice participate to lawyers in make it easier for to litigation. experimental affirming the above While of local courts, most direct the and measures security trials and court attending checks when one-stop a and set be service hearings, would in filing, lawyers for convenient it more up make service, and courtobtaining date, fees, paying In 2013, December materials. litigation accepting the same as prosecutors. In November 2013, 2013, In November the same as prosecutors. the superio RespectingOpinion on Further and Protecting and Regulating Rights Practice to Lawyers’ which stipulated Judge-Lawyer Relationship, go through did not need to lawyers that Establishing Positive Interaction Judges between Establishing Positive which Justice, Promote Jointly to and Lawyers security a for need no was there that stipulated the court came to check when lawyers and if when security circumstances special were there be treated should lawyers needed, checks were Lawyers’ Entering Courts in Beijing. Starting Starting Courts Entering Beijing. in Lawyers’ “temporary for 1, 2013, except September in Beijingto only needed lawyers checking”, certificate enter to their professional show courts. In October superior 2013, the court in Certain on issued Opinions province Henan on reform of the trial management responsibility of the trial responsibility management on reform of the courtof the chief justice and head of established record the tribunal with a track process. the entire throughout officially launched in December 2013 and will 2013 and will officially launched in December program, the to According years. two for last the pilot courts will set up an open information which will make the trial procedure, platform, information and enforcement document, verdict apparatus Trial transparent. and open completely reasonably way, will be set up in a scientific responsibility with good defining the division of the various units within between coordination will help supportwhich system, the the initiative trial and administrative The of the judge. functions units within the court of the various with strengthened will be deployed system the single that ensure to checks and balances, judge and members of the trial panel are justly and independently. trial power exercising system and accountability unified power The and the panel, the collegial of the single judge, The will be strictlytrial committee implemented. be will trialthe of committee procedure of rules of discussion of the clarify the scope to improved is the focus these pilot measures, Among cases. judges. Threshold criteria of judges need to criteria need to of judges Threshold judges. legal one must have be a judge, To be stricter. with a certaineducation of years number of in practice The lawyer. a as experience practical selecting of from judges systems law common should is an especially good model that lawyers in the future. be the main mechanism Power Trial of (II) Better Exercising practice the sound at having to key issue The interference. administrative eliminate trial is to Court A issued In Supreme the October2013, of Judicial Deepening of Reform Program Pilot deciding to Process, Trial and Transparency intermediate-level 7 at start reform pilot a courts courts 2 basic-level and in Shanghai, and and Shaanxi provinces Guangdong, Jiangsu, was program pilot reform The municipalities. system of selection, appointment, promotion promotion selection, of appointment, system of professionalism ensure to and discipline, In order to realize these goals, the traditional traditional the these goals, realize In to order selection mechanism of judges needs to and a unified judge selection be changed, using a scientific up, be set needs to committee professionals; building a sound unified unified building a sound professionals; position exchange, recruitment, mechanism for prosecutors, of judges, progression and gradual human resource improving officers; and police of legal categories of the different management and achieving their job securities. professional; before and need to be implemented soon. be implemented and need to before 2013 clearly out laid Decision of November The the goals and tasks: establishing a management suits characteristics that of the legal system and marshals; improving judges’ job security;job judges’ and marshals; improving salary increasing gradually and benefits; and select to more human resource broadening legal and outstanding lawyers judges from in been mentioned have points These scholars. building documents legal professional many judges, judicial assistants, and administrative administrative and assistants, judicial judges, criteria and threshold staff; judges’ tightening of the reform advancing selection process; of management improving progression; judge’s sheriffs of management court regulating clerks; ethics and clean government, and organization and organization ethics and clean government, building. development career Opinion highlighted This Specifically legal professionals. directions for of and responsibility it clarified the power Professionals under the New Situation. It It Situation. New the under Professionals the from judicial abilities enhance to proposed training, nine aspects: professional following leadership building, ideological and political party communist management, staff building, building, grassroots building, work, culture iv. Strengthening Capacity Building of of Capacity Building Strengthening iv. Professionals Judicial Court Ina Octoberissued Supreme the 2013, Certain entitled directive Opinions on Further Capacity Building of Judicial Strengthening 20

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 21 The higher court may alter the lower courts’ courts’ higher court the lower The alter may and re-trial, review but the through verdicts procurator the by initiated be to has process change of a verdict The or the parties. the higher courtby does not necessarily the trial of the lower court in any way; court way; the trial of the lower in any the function judicial the from differentiate function; and clearly define administrative relationship management the administrative The court. the higher and lower between lower the court affect higher only should and court jurisdiction-level oversight, through with the courtthe lower will only cooperate file statistics, higher court of sheriffs, in areas technology. and information management, “self-revolution.” was Program Pilot the that Itnoted be should the Decision, had been and it issued before expected the fourth that five-year reform a more outline of the court propose would judicial for program reform comprehensive Some major suggested independence. administrative reducing for measures reform are: interference court influencing higher the from Prohibit 1. tribunal’s review and approval of trial should trial of should and approval review tribunal’s the and conditions, without any be abolished relationship The repealed. trial committee court and lower the higher be should between and power then the integrated clearlydefined, thus preventing can be realized, accountability through of responsibility” or evasion the“sharing the trial judge, of the single efforts” “collective courtthe of the chiefs and tribunal, panel, In short,and the trial committee. the division of functions within the court should focus and limiting roles “leadership” on clarifying of the and the adjustment power; “leadership” court the higher and lower between relationship on the higher court up many should focus giving court. the lower over control and of its powers which administrative to the degree Therefore depends on the court, is reduced interference of resolution Court’s especially the Supreme be true judicial independence, the practice of the practice of be true judicial independence, of the courtthe chief justice and the head of leaders to influence the trial. the trial. influence leaders to court to reform resistance the that shows This from mainly comes independence and judge’s is to if there Actually, the court itself. system head of the tribunal will definitely affect judges’ affect judges’ head of the tribunal will definitely are there when Even judgment. independent power the management of records complete of procedure of rules improved and exercised ensure to it is insufficient the trial committee, the for is still room There trials. independent and the Supreme Court’s Pilot Program of of Program Pilot Court’s and the Supreme and Transparency Judicial of Reform Deepening and far from weak appears rather Process Trial the example, For design. in overall adequate and justice chief the of power trialmanagement making. administrative reducing Nonetheless, be a difficult process. is bound to interference operational concrete no been has So there far the objective of reform, implement to proposal relationship within the court and between court within the relationship and between court, as the as well the higher and lower of judges themselves, development professional and interference administrative reduce as to so decision- of judge’s the independence increasing and lower court.” The Decision also proposed proposed also Decision The court.” lower and management set up a human resource to suits the characteristics that of different system their ensure to of legal professionals categories the entry judicial for Thus, point job security. of the working shall be the adjustment reform system; improve the accountability of presiding of presiding the accountability improve system; make judge and trialpanel; let the adjudicator the decision; for be accountable and the verdict clarify functions of courts various levels; at of the higher and define jurisdiction oversight The Decision of the Third Plenary Session of Plenary of Session Third the of Decision The Communist the of Congress National 18th the in November Committee Party Central the sound practice on of 2013 emphasized administrative and eliminating judicial power committee trial the “reform It stated: interference. higher court cannot impose any kind of higher court kind impose any cannot of court. inspection lower on the administrative of judges based and evaluation management be only should Data on numbers and figures. purposes. statistical used for trials of facts previous be final based on and the first trial by and supplemented trial of law, practice. trial final final and second head of the collegial panel responsible. In April panel responsible. head of the collegial 2013 the Superior Court in Henan province in panel system of collegial a new form piloted courts courts. basic-level 30 and intermediate 6 beginning with the civil trial reform launched in trial with the civil reform beginning Outlines of Reform Five-Year three The 1980s. late Court of judicial the Supreme and the last round goal“to the emphasized all program reform strengthen trial panel and to the collegial reform been have directives related Several its function”. of the Collegial such as Certainissued, Provisions Court; Certain of the People’s Panels Trial Deputy Chief Justice, Opinions on Chief Justice, Tribunal Deputy of and Head Tribunal of Head and Certain Panels; Trial in Collegial Participating of Function the Increasing Further of Provisions is in this regard reform Yet Panels. Trial Collegial the for common quite is it and weak rather still only. in form exist panels to some pilot practice in local courts In contrast, in recent instance, For in new ideas. has brought district of Shenzhen and Yantian in the years court the district Shijingshan Beijing, has in the for judge responsible made the presiding district court Intrial. of Shenzhen 2012 Futian made courtand the intermediate of Foshan 5. Abolish the judicial inspection practice. The The inspection the judicial 5. Abolish practice. practice of court 6. Repeal the current trial will the third whereby 7. Establish a system Panel Trial Collegial the Advancing i. Reform trial panel has been one of collegial Reform the years, over of courtof the focuses reform can only give advisorycan only give opinions on certain in a case. legal issues involved directly contrary to the principle of rhetoric directly contrary the principle of rhetoric to a As and impedes judicial independence. the committee before measure, transitional be function its could altogether, abolished is of an advisorydefined as that entity it and committee and its operation be improved be improved and its operation committee of discussion of the cases be and the scope of the problem resolve This will not defined.” “those who conduct the trial do not make the decision and those who make the decision is practice This trial.” in present not are adverse consequences, including resignation. resignation. including consequences, adverse requested Program Pilot above-mentioned of the trial “the rule of procedure that the power of court and tribunal chiefs. Their Their court of chiefs. tribunal and power the the courtmain function to represent is to conduct and to administrative the public, It affairs. judicial internal of management interference any that should be clearly stated trial a case should lead to of of a judge’s the court or tribunal gives instructions to a the court instructions a or tribunal to gives court of chief tribunal and The case. specific Reduce trial. with a judge’s shall not interfere relating to a specific case. This was already already was This a specific case. to relating Set-Up of System Opinion in the mentioned which Cases, Wrongly-Handled Preventing for not ask “shall court the lower demands that instruction higher courtfor from regarding facts of a case.” or evidence among the judges. among the judges. instructions about a certain and the case, instruction Court Supreme give will no longer mean an error of verdict by the lower court. the lower by of verdict error mean an be cases has to of misjudged Investigation of corruption, cases strictly a few to limited arbitrarya wantonly and verdict. favoritism, of trialis only a division in level difference The of status is no difference of labor; there 4. Abolish the trial committee practice. The The practice. the trial4. Abolish committee 3. Abolish the practice whereby the chief of the chief of the practice whereby 3. Abolish 2. Completely abolish the practice of asking for asking of practice for the abolish Completely 2. 22

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 23 cannot exercise trial power in an equal and in an equal and trial power cannot exercise judicial ensure to way The manner. independent eliminate or reduce to be should independence the current yet interference, administrative meddling, administrative more fostered system According to the proposal of the Decision: of the Decision: the proposal to According trial judge and collegial presiding improve “to system, panel responsibility/accountability decision the make adjudicator the let to as so the for accountable be decision-maker the and It can be expected the collegial that decision.” But activelywill be implemented. reform panel local interference of reducing just as the reform the program interference, and administrative be more needs to panel reform of collegial to and must be pointed and feasible concrete the direction of full judicial independence. practice judge presiding the current Although a certain to judicial independence enhanced power integrated closer to extent and moved On defects. it has obvious and accountability, the superficiality it reduced the one hand, the of panel; on the other it added another collegial the panel must act i.e., under layer, “leadership” judge and judges the leadership of the presiding practice; there is a judge conference which which is a judge conference practice; there is no there case-relatedwill decide matters; in unit administrative corresponding hierarchy court, but only support and lower the higher human trial in management, and coordination supervision, affairs office, judicial resource traditional The sheriffs. and unit, enforcement functions of the tribunalbe handled chief will and trial management a judge conference by functions will be administrative and office, the head of the court,handled by human supervision affairs judicial the and resource the traditional broke exploration This office. internal court, the of reduced structure internal the and enhanced interference, administrative It with the of judges. complies professionalism and has great of judicial power rule of operation national the for significance demonstrative of the court system. reform own management system; there are no case- are there system; management own tribunals and no case approval differentiated court established in Zhuhai city, Guangdong Guangdong city, Zhuhai courtin established Their 2013. December of end the in province a fixed included: having exploratory measures each supported judges, number of eight by their and one clerk; assistants three judges have of Deepening Judicial Transparency and Trial Trial and Transparency of Deepening Judicial pilot courts. reform which expanded Practice, judge practice, In the presiding to comparison measures reform bold and comprehensive more the Heng Qin new district by adopted were retrial than in the previous year, and public and public year, than in the previous retrial . Based on these good decreased complaints Court some of the the Supreme assigned results, pilot courts.courts In the meantime reform as Program Pilot The Courtthe Supreme issued to the year before, 9,849 more cases were closed, closed, cases were 9,849 more before, the year to to declined complaints of written and the rate In Foshan in the city. the lowest 0.8%, which was court,city first 10 months in the intermediate of cases filed number of 2013, while the overall for remanded cases were 14 fewer increased, a judge’s professionalism and accountability, and accountability, professionalism a judge’s the increasing and corruption, reducing in instance, quality and efficiency For of trials. district court trial level Futian in Shenzhen, the efficiency tripled in 2013. Compared increased team. judicial ensure to is initiative this of aim core The the widespread overcome to and independence defects of“separation of trial verdict- and is helpful in improving initiative This making.” making, and the final signature of a case, and and of a case, making, and the final signature job division of team for is also responsible presiding The evaluation. members and their and responsibility power judge has integrated the by the case handled for and is accountable The names may vary but the basic concept is vary names may is The the basic concept but through selected is judge presiding similar: a and is supported judge by process, an open judge plays presiding The and staff. assistants manager, and case adjudicator as the key role decision- assignment, case for responsible the introduction of expert jurors could achieve of expertthe introduction achieve could jurors results. positive has been reform system in juror Some success courtlocal in some For achieved experiments. Third Plenary Session of the 18th Communist PlenaryThird Session of the 18th Communist for“extensive called Committee Party Central and people’s jurors practice of people’s channel the broaden to mechanism monitors public participation orderly for in judicial true hope this will help promote Many matters.” Supreme the In December, democracy. judicial projects be Court instructed reform pilot that intermediate- in some and basic-employed and municipalities, courtslevel provinces in ten measures reform The including Beijing. selection the of scope the expanding included: selection applying the random of jurors; of juror principle; the case range expanding file of rights trialparticipation; ensuring jurors’ trialparticipation, dissenting giving and review, procedure the commenting opinions; improving expert in panel; inviting jurors of the collegial jurors’ special types strengthening of cases; a and standards funding establishing training; these Among mechanism. adjustment periodic selection the random method and measures, low; most jurors were part of the elite; powers partlow; powers were the elite; of jurors most jurors most unclear, were responsibilities and were and there only, in mediation involved were etc. no subsidies, of on expansion In practice focused 2013 juror In the 2013, at May the scale of the initiative. the goal was video conference, nationwide within two 200,000 to jurors increase set to courts. of the In various levels at October years Supreme of the Chief Justice 2013 Zhou Qiang, a report Committee the Standing Court, to gave on the Congress People’s of the National Improving of Decision The of implementation to and proposed System Jurors the People’s and leadership, the organization strengthen training, enhance numbers, the juror increase trial participation, more encourage raise and the Decision of the In November, awareness. no authority and no reasonable method of no authority method of and no reasonable in participation public interest was evaluation; present but having no say in the trial. Other Other in the trial. no say but having present included: the system of the juror problems too high, the fixed was requirement qualification of their participation the scope rigid, too term and function unclear; the decision made had three times that of 2006, and the number of of 2006, and the number of times that three cases they participated 6.289 in trial reached criminal were million 1.764 which of million, and 0.227 million 4.298 million civil cases, cases, this a long time, for Yet cases. administrative with the jurors a superficialwas formality, judicial democracy. Since the implementation implementation the Since judicial democracy. Jurors the People’s Decision of Improving The of jurors 2004, 8.034 million people’s in System participated the In in trials. 2012 alone, have who participated number of jurors in trials was independently without any interference from from interference without any independently or individual. organization any Reform ii. Conducting Pilot Jury System jury realizing The to main path is the system separate judge progression and management and management judge progression separate eliminating thoroughly T=thereby mechanism - collegial of the operation the administrative panel collegial the that ensuring and panel trial power and the single judge can exercise or tribunal; abolishing the trial committee; or tribunal; the trial abolishing committee; abolishing the practice of asking instruction for case trial; accountability implementing for the handled cases; improving wrongly for higher providing judge selection process; salaries and job security; a and establishing and every and commenting the judge; defining streamlining panel; the collegial of rules voting the to the case- according handling process case; abolishing the case complexity of the the chief of the court practice by approval which is definitely not the most desirable most desirable not the definitely which is solution. must panel reform collegial the future Therefore, ensuring achieving the following: at be aimed of each of trial power exercise the independent 24

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 25 whether a jury is involved. The use of a juryThe whether a jury is involved. of should depend on the specific situation The juryof rule the and case the involvement. states “when there is difference in opinions opinions in difference is “whenthere states shall panel the and the judge, the jurors of the chief of courtsubmit the case to to the trial the case to submit decide whether to and decision and discussion for committee be Decisionsshould explanation.” provide to strict in of made observationprinciple the of majority vote. basic subsidies only providing duties: first, transportation time, costs, loss of work for abolishing the and meal subsidies; second, third, jurors; of practiceassessment of current right of jurors’ the protection strengthening vote opinions and to independent give to speech and action Jurors’ independently. during jury duty from performance free are must enable legal action, and employers participate to selected in trial; jurors four, protection safety effective the for providing jurors. for first, abolish training for jurors and adopt the and for jurors abolish training first, like the countries law practice in common instruction where is given Britainand the U.S. juryto about guidebook is a concise there and and performance obligations, rights, jurors’ fact-finding separate second, requirements; participation jurors with application, and law cannot be jurors only in fact-finding; third, during a sound justification without changed status equal have jurors that ensure trial; four, the number of increase the judge; five, to there usually panel where in a collegial jurors so as to jurors and four will be one judge judge; six, the the guiding by strong prevent panel will be selected by head of the collegial and when making on lots, comments drawing an give the judge should be the last to a case, rule which abolish the current opinion; seven, 5. Abolish the court on based 5. Abolish system assessment 4. Measure to ensure jurors can perform their perform can jurors ensure their to 4. Measure 3. Improve the process of jurors’ participation: of jurors’ the process 3. Improve permit expansion. Currently it could be temporarily limited to to limited be temporarily it could Currently subjectyears 10 to are that criminal cases criminalor with cases more, or imprisonment the scope Infuture, the social concerns. great when judicial resources can be expanded and enthusiasm of participation. Theoretically, Theoretically, of participation.and enthusiasm old years of 22 citizens from application any in the database should be entered and above selectedand randomly when needed. common people and have a broader base base a broader have people and common on it should primarily rely of representation; motivation voluntary ensure to application 2. Define the scope for the use of jurors. of jurors. the use for 2. Definethe scope 1. Selection of people’s jurors should be from should be from jurors 1. Selection of people’s touched on or solved, making it difficult to making it difficult to on or solved, touched following The jury a truly effective system. have on based reform juror for made are suggestions in Guangan Sichuan province the experience an on working procuratorate with the together system. monitoring of the people’s experiment The above measures are conducive to increasing increasing to conducive are measures above The function in trial participation and jurors’ situation some defects of the current mitigated without participating presence mere of jurors’ not been have problems But the core in trial. Jiangbei court in Ningbo with city experimented practice in the trials of business jury” “grand the fact-finding and law-applying cases where in fact a key role play and jurors separated are verification. in Nanjing city introduced larger collegial panel panel collegial larger in Nanjing city introduced a form jurors judge and four in which one reform jurors five judges and or two “five-person panel”, increase so as to panel” “seven-person a form in a case. the proportion of jurors and influence instance, courts in Shanghai and Fuzhou have have courts and Fuzhou in Shanghai instance, expert cases involving in long invited jurors knowledge intellectualas specialized such more foreign involving property cases business and parties, making thus inadequacies in some up for Ningjiang knowledge. court professional judges’ The court is not an administrative agency courtThe and is not an administrative administrative should not be managed through data performance Relevant assessments. statistics judicial for used be only should requires who A judge is not an official purposes. falsification without regard to justice and judicial to justice regard without falsification the case quality evaluation Second, efficiency. court a does not only evaluate but also a judge, increase normal trials, affect a judge’s which may judicial distort on judges, a judge’s the burden judicial affect adversely acts therefore and in the problems are there Lastly, independence. the current instance, For itself. system evaluation reflect judicial can hardly and indicators index obtain to objectively; hard is it effectiveness about public satisfaction;data and setting the mediation through settled cases of percentage litigation, over mediation to preference gives in compulsory result which may mediation. case quality and court evaluation Therefore, performance not scientific are assessments final and The of judicial activities. evaluations is fairness and justice, only judicial standard litigation Under this premise, nothing else. and judicial efficiencyeffectiveness could standard. the next of evaluation become level rational use of the assessment index in court in index at assessment the of use rational tendency the unhealthy prevent and to all levels was the This directive numbers first.” “putting of after document operational first assessment of Conducting Guiding Opinion the 2011 Case define the which helped to Quality Evaluation, the evaluation But in reality, drive. evaluation harm way and in some good than did more drive counterproductive. even was of fact be a radical should a matter there As rethinking quality about case and evaluation the case court performance First, assessment. a quality practice has become evaluation in court work. In a para- baton” “commanding indicator court any system, administrative through trigger practice competition could which may resources, to access competitive even pursuit of numbers and fervent lead to could be tried when and where the jury the jury be tried when and where could model future The is working well. system be co-existence jurycould of grand trialand jury participated trials. the jury system on the basis of the current current the of basis jury the the on system an emphasis on with judicial interpretation, jury participation. Grand substantial practice role of the juryrole the quality depends on system of participation, cases that the number of not used in. are jurors knowledge. specialized which gave clear definitions of “dimensionless “dimensionless of clear definitions which gave ensure to method” synthetic “index and method” evaluator of courtevaluator trials and verdicts. The CourtInSupreme 2013, the June issued Method Index of the Compiling Assessment Court (Trial), Quality Handling of People’s of Case means, which strengthened administrative administrative which strengthened means, court. of the higher court the lower over control online and being publicized with verdicts Along of trials, broadcast live implementing gradually should be “two evaluations” internal the court’s best the is public the only because abolished should pay attention to their words, manners, manners, their words, to attention should pay in court. Itand the image they create also could the writing to attention more make them pay drive this But their verdicts. of and reasoning supervising is judiciary the administrative with 2,767,000 trials and 1.4386 million verdicts were were 2,767,000 trials and 1.4386 million verdicts the courts throughout and evaluated reviewed in 2013. continued drive This in the country. Courtelements. the key hearings and trials are reflect on the could of the two So evaluation handling of a case and judges quality of a judge’s In 2012 the Supreme Court issued The Notice of Notice The In Court 2012 the Supreme issued Verdict and Evaluation Trial CourtConducting Training Grand Among Documents Evaluation drive,” “two evaluation During the of all Staff. iii. Improving Case Evaluation Practice 7. In the future, enact separate legislation on on legislation enact separate In 7. future, the 6. Inviting expert jurors in trials that require expert6. Inviting require in trials that jurors 26

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 27 amend the judgment and amend the judgment and deducting enforcee’s funds in the bank. funds in the bank. and deducting enforcee’s of Certain 2013 the directive In November of Platforms Three Opinions of Advancing Supreme the by issued Transparency Judicial the purpose of judicial for that Court required appeal. appeal. Advancing Enforcement Reform ii. of made in the reform was Some progress in 2013. In work January the enforcement information of the enforcement upgrading of all courtssystems in the country was of In July 2013 Certaincompleted. Provisions the Namelist of Dishonest Enforcees Publicizing six circumstances which specified issued, was has the ability honor to the enforcee where so do to refuse may but verdict the effective Courts and thus will be put on the namelist. the Sichuan, and Shanxi publicized in Beijing, The In September 2013, namelist successively. of Network Querying and Freezing Provision specified the court’s Bank Account Enforcee’s the Also, network procedures. enforcement Court of the Supreme Bureau Enforcement state- with several a memorandum entered network on banks querying,owned freezing, At present, the Supreme Court has drafted Court Supreme the drafted has present, At of the application regarding provisions detailed stage of soliciting the at which are guiding cases, Itpublished soon. will be and comments is further will provisions detailed the that expected mechanism, especially the case guiding improve We cases. the authority of and application the suggestions: further the following propose allowing cases”; “similar of clarifying the standard the party the guiding case; quote to and lawyer to reference make court the to allowing verdict guiding case; the by trial principles indicated make it clear whether the judge to obliging the is applicable; removing the guiding case of a guiding case the application that request and reported in the verdict to be explained In which in cases court the office. case guiding and the not followed the guiding case was appellate the wrong, was law the of application court change or could the party for reason use it as a legitimate could could be quoted, and what the remedies are if if are the remedies and what be quoted, could not followed. the guiding cases are of the cases. Although the 2010 Guiding Case the 2010 Guiding Case Although of the cases. courts all at “[p]eople’s that stated Provisions published to should make reference levels similar cases,” guiding cases when adjudicating how “similar”, it is not clear about the meaning of whether the case should be made, reference Advancing Three Platforms of Judicial of Judicial Platforms Three Advancing Court. the Supreme issued by Transparency be should focus main the Inmeantime, the The of guiding cases. the application to switched effectiveness clarify authoritative the key is to the law and public policy. There is also hope is also hope There and public policy. the law the full Court the Supreme will promote that and establish a online of verdicts publication court in accordance nationwide case database of Certainwith the directive Opinions of are both low. Hopefully the Supreme Court Hopefully the Supreme will both low. are guiding cases and publishing more accelerate function Court;the of regular key a it the make judicial interpretations guiding cases will replace the Supreme that way the main and become of the application for guidance Court provides November 2013 the fifth batch of six guiding the fifth 2013 of six guiding batch November began mechanism case guiding the Since cases. Court in 2010, the Supreme has only published The and 22 guiding cases in total. batches five frequency publications and numbers of such (III) Optimization of Court Function (III) Optimization Case Mechanism i. Improving Guiding CourtIn 2013, the Supreme published February guiding cases; and in the fourth of four batch judicial independence, reasonable disciplinary reasonable judicial independence, so ethics, and a sense of professional measures, make the handling of each and everyas to case fair and just. performance evaluation; a judge is a magistrate performance is a magistrate a judge evaluation; It is therefore trial power. who exercises are that data and indicators all that suggested performance be a judge’s evaluate to designed judicial of realizing element key The abandoned. but accountability, fairnessevaluation is not Program of Centralized Administrative Case Trial Trial Case Administrative of Centralized Program superior that Court the Supreme required by intermediate two or one courts designate courts courts intermediate and the designated courts basic-level three to two designate transparency, which is a helpful procedure for for is a helpful procedure which transparency, Supreme the of Committee Compensation the cases compensation Court state in reviewing and ensuring equal participation and equal opinions know express rights to and to the and applicant compensation the about Besides improving agency. state compensating be paid to needs to attention the procedure, and filing” in “difficulty issues of outstanding the compensation in state of enforcement” “difficulty and better more should be given Citizens cases. should be of compensation standards remedies; and broader, of compensation the scope higher, structure and functioning the organizational of be needs to committee compensation the state system fundamental Only through improved. mechanism compensation can the state reforms or diminished cases such and realized be occurring. from prevented of the court measures In addition, other reform of Pilot Notice The also included: in January 2013 also laid out specific provisions about the entity about the out specific provisions also laid parties participating procedure, the organizing preparation, notice, and the in the procedure, extension, and minutes, sequence, content, burden The of the procedure. effectiveness compensation for is on the applicant of proof agencyfor is sued and the government that favorable evidence present is to compensation cases, In compensation state special case. its to agencyfor the government with an obligation The proof. of burden special a has compensation of limitations, also specified a statute Provisions and the legal submission, of evidence terms extensionoverdue of and consequences It submission. evidence evidence- emphasized not evidence that specified and trials based in fact cannot be used admitted verification. judicial implementing aimed at Provision The and conditions prescribed by law, all cross- law, by prescribed and conditions It should be conducted openly. examination resolved through trial by written communication, communication, written trial by through resolved be should procedures cross-examination It emphasised the principle of open employed. circumstances for cross-examination: except personal privacy, secrets, state involving Provisions of the Compensation Committee Committee of the Compensation Provisions Court Cross-examination Using of People’s Compensation State Adjudicate to Procedures is controversy It when there that stated Cases. tort of damage, facts,regarding consequences cannot be and the controversy and causation, comprehensive framework against corruption. against corruption. framework comprehensive iii. Improving State Compensation CourtIn 2013 the Supreme December issued apart from reinforcing measures and procedures and procedures measures apart reinforcing from cooperate, to the enforcee and encouraging system emphasis should be put on overall more even and justice, independence, judicial reform, “chaotic of problem The reform. political system be dealt with in the needs to enforcement” of working mechanisms and methods and of working and mechanisms and methods powers of enforcement decentralization even of the woods.” “out get us not enough to are root. their be dealt with at to have Problems enforcement,” “difficult of the problem solve To and strengthening enforcement. Over the past Over the past enforcement. and strengthening reform enforcement although many years, the problem been introduced, have measures has still of difficult and chaotic enforcement enforcement that shows This not been solved. project, and improvement is a systemic reform restricted for high consumption be publicized, so be publicized, high consumption restricted for push and system, credit public a establish to as information. full transparency of enforcement for regulating to conducive are initiatives above The transparency the enforcement information information transparency enforcement the simultaneous and query be improved; system in major be done video recording audio and hearings case and implementation; enforcement those who of dishonest enforcees, namelists and are the country, leaving restricted from are 28

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 29 mediation organizations and social capacities and social capacities organizations mediation drain overly so as not to should be introduced judicial resources. limited Mechanisms. The initial idea is to make judges or make initial idea is to The Mechanisms. skills mediation strong with full- judge assistants the solve to in order mediators time professional and of mediation of non-separation problems idea The compulsoryand litigation mediation. civic direction, in the right but more is a step In May 2013 the Supreme Court revealed that it it that CourtIn Supreme 2013 the May revealed professional full-time a up setting explore would practice the basis of its 2012 on mediator of Convergence Program Reform Pilot Overall Resolution Dispute and Alternative of Litigation as focal points for administrative case trial. trial. case administrative for points as focal local helps avoid mechanism reform This a certain to ensuring that by extent, interference, an independent before jurisdiction is transferred court is established. administrative over oversight by post and inspection; making post and inspection; by making oversight the disciplinary more duel leadership system the leadership and strengthening effective, disciplinaryof higher level committee In investigating committee. level the lower disciplinary higher level the corruption, inspection by the central government started, started, government inspection the central by and reporting “discovering on which focused acts law violating regarding information relevant “spot-checking and discipline” and Open leading officials.” disclosed by information measures These deployed. was media coverage On October 22, 2013, effective. subtly were report a released Procuratorate Supreme the bribery anti-corruption and efforts regarding of the National Committee the Standing to after the years twenty-four Congress, People’s the central that indicated This report.previous up its anti-corruption is speeding government drive. Third Decision of the November The Plenary a special session to Session devoted of checks “strengthening emphasizing the and ” of power, exercise over and oversight anti-corruption of innovation the boosting to in this main progress The safeguards. system the duel strengthening included: first, regard leadership of the party disciplinary committee; disciplinary the central intensifying committee’s High-level officials at the provincial or minister or minister the provincial at High-level officials Liu Chuncheng, Li include punished level Suyi, Li Wang Yongxiang, Guo Ni Fake, Tienan, Liao Shaohua, Ji Jianye, Jiang Jiemin, Daqiu, Chen Anzhong, Chen Baihuai, Youming, Guo Mingqian. Bo High cases like Xilai, profile Tong were Xueren Tian and Huangsheng, Zhijun, Liu central reflecting the and sentenced, prosecuted in combating determination government’s corruption. building efforts Anti-corruption system and of In 2013, a new round May continued. disciplined. disciplined. bribery and 23,017 persons, 16,510 cases, totaled and crime reports 5.51 billion yuan. Complaints party the communist by disciplinary received supervision 1,950,374, in 2013 reached agencies and investigated of which 172,532 cases were 182,038 persons were 173,186 cases closed. 32 were above the provincial or minister level. level. or minister the provincial above 32 were 2012 the number of offenders 2008 to From bribery receiving bribery or giving increased of November As 19.5% and 60.4% respectively. and corruption involving 2013, investigations public, 35.4% uncovered by the Procuratorate, the Procuratorate, by 35.4% uncovered public, disciplinary by supervision and 9.5% referred the defendant’s through and 23% were agencies, referral. another agency’s or from surrender carried out on leaders were 13,368 investigations of which chief level, or division the county above and bribery cases involving 198,781 suspects, and bribery 198,781 suspects, cases involving and of prosecuted among whom 167,514 were losses Economic convicted. were 148,931 those the 37.7 billion yuan. Among reached recovered reported the by were 32.1% cases, investigated In recent years, the Procuratorate has has the Procuratorate years, In recent the investigation increased continuously one’s to of crimes and punishment related January 2013 the August 2008 to position. From corruption 15,1350 investigated Procuratorate procuratory oversight of civil litigation, and and of civil litigation, procuratory oversight capacity of procurators. building increased Anti- the of Reform Deepening i. Corruption System In 2013 the Procuratorate doubled its anti- In 2013 the Procuratorate case efforts. Itcorruption procurator piloted to established mechanisms responsibility, the strengthened investigations, preventillegal functionand appeals criminal procuratory in III. Reform Measures of the Procuratorate Procuratorate of the Measures III. Reform 30

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 31 erification, the pilot anti-corruption is a “self revolution,” it could be be it could revolution,” “self anti-corruption is a be forgiven sin” “original the that considered and disclosure a certainto extent technically, officials below with newly appointed begins and their officials’ The department level. director declarations to include all assets, requiring an an requiring assets, all include to declarations of the legalityexplanation of newly acquired provides regulation InRussia, the relevant assets. their and officials government all that only not annually, family members must disclose assets military officials, and but also prohibits officers owning from their spouse and minor children abroad. and stocks properties, bank accounts, establish such a it is difficult to In contrast, ago years A few in China. system disclosure in Altay processes pilot disclosure were there of Hunan, Liuyang of Zhejiang, Cixi of Xinjiang, due yet of Anhui, Lichuan of Jiangxi, and Lujiang dishonest non-disclosure, of problems the to and lack of strict v disclosure, formality and encountered a mere was system local officials. from a certain of resistance level is the most crucial asset disclosure Officials’ which reflects the measure, and most effective of anti-corruption of determination degree up as should be set efforts, so the system have Decision seems to The soon as possible. Since way. but in a vague upon this, touched place, and the possible system reform remains remains reform system and the possible place, superficialbased on principles but without mechanism. implementation an effective that and given this situation to In response of establishment the rooted, deep is corruption anti-corruption and effective system a mature least in the following at should be dealt with aspects: four an official assets disclosure implement First, practice the in which is a common practice, this have least 137 countries at present, At world. Hong in China’s and it is also in place regulation if an official In Macao, Taiwan. Macao and Kong, the only other assets, disclose to does not want a system Vietnam, In socialist resign. option is to property of the official disclosure declarations for in 2010, and in 2012 the Anti- introduced was of property the scope expanded Law Corruption of a pilot a pilot of of hope for reinvigorating the anti-corruption anti-corruption the reinvigorating of hope for is still not in the critical apparatus system, leading officials. leading officials. only the are efforts and reforms above The go because to is a long way and there beginning and deep-rooted, comprehensive, is corruption a ray the Decision Although offers systemic. disclose relevant personal information. Those Those information. personal disclose relevant important hide honestly or it who do not do in or listed not be promoted shall information spot-checks reserve;the official in the meantime, disclosed by information will be conducted for attaching importance to public oversight via the importanceattaching oversight public to Internet.In Communist the same month, the Department Organization issued a PartyCentral Disclosure Officials’ Leading of Furthering Notice requesting Information, Personal Relevant of and honestly take initiative leading officials to of “hitting both a fly and a tiger.” As the overall the overall As “hitting a fly and a tiger.” both of anti-corruption plan of future efforts, master and using legal concepts stressed the Plan conductingcorruption, fight the pilot means to and disclosure, practicesleading officials’ of new and Improving the System of Punishing and and of Punishing System the Improving and directive The 2013-2017. Corruption, Preventing anti-corruption principles guiding for provided ase strict years in the nextwork party five and the mass line, to adherence discipline, resolve the party’s Itbuilding ethics. also showed living abroad.” living abroad.” Partythe of Central Poliburo the InDecember, anti- five-year second the adopted Committee Establishing of Plan Working the plan, corruption Party Central Disciplinary Committee published published Disciplinary Committee PartyCentral an article the Decision which interpreting “the promotion further stressed officials leading appointed newly of practice spouse’ their regarding information disclosing of and status assets, job positions, and children’s committee will take the lead. Second, the the Second, take the lead. will committee of laws the improvement also included progress disclosure on leading officials’ and regulations pilot a and information, personal relevant of appointed newly by disclosure such of project Communist of the website The leading officials. In December 2013, the Supreme Procuratorate Procuratorate In 2013, the Supreme December of Procurator’s Program Pilot The issued and planned In Handling, Case Accountability encourage acts in anti- encourage of public engagement online anti-corruption Several corruption. the again demonstrated cases in 2013 once anti- in impactengagement public of great cases of a group Examples were corruption. a judges, Shanghai by prostitutes of visit in a room” “opening judge of Hubei province and property lawyer, with a woman a hotel Huang and Shaanxi in Gongof Aiai owners Decision the Although Guangdong. in Zhongyi and legal, democratic, “improving proposed and regulating and deploying public oversight, further on crackdown on the Internet,” oversight of freedom control that online rumors showed If the government of speech is being tightened. corruption, in combating is firmsincere and them to allowing on the people, it must rely reports of and encouraging their opinions, voice corruption. Accountability Pilot ii. Procurator’s Program incidents prompted a reflection on “shuang gui,” “shuang gui,” a reflection on prompted incidents people most Since its repeal. calls for and again, appeal this officials, for speak to willing not are protection the equal for But resonance. had little of basic human rights the rights, of human This officials also should be protected. corrupt society of a ruled by is a basic requirement “everyone practices the principle that of law see It to is gratifying law.” the is equal before the end of At the tunnel. the end of at the light the of official an to according 2013, November partycommunist disciplinary central committee, a in crime involved is official an if future, the in position, it will not be one’s connected to the party handled by disciplinarycommittee the but will be directly by first, handled In criminal liability. to according procuratorate anti-corruption will be governed work this way, the rule of law. by of speech and freedom protect Fourth, evel of comprehensive disclosure as soon as as soon as disclosure of comprehensive evel Jia Jiuxiang, died during “shuang gui.” These These gui.” “shuang died during Jia Jiuxiang, at a designated time and place (“shuang zhi,” zhi,” (“shuang place and time designated a at handling method violates This designated). two and often violates of the law the due process In 2013, an official from basic rights. a person’s “shuang under a bath” “during City died Wenzhou and the deputy head of Sanmenxia Court, gui,” Third, put the party disciplinary measure put the partyThird, disciplinary measure a legal specified) into (two gui” “shuang of means measure gui” “shuang The framework. the party disciplinary demands that committee a party a at an explanation member provide For non- at a specified place. specified time and party be made is to members the explanation full responsibility for all anti-corruption matters, all anti-corruption matters, for full responsibility independently and conducts investigations of any the interference without law to according or individual. organization Experience could be drawn from the Hong Kong from be drawn could Experience anti-corruption where functions be ICAC, could combined and procuratorate the from separated party the with disciplinary agency Chinese with integrated and independent The characteristics. with anti-corruption is entrusted commission (ICAC). Under the current system, the party the party system, (ICAC). Under the current and “tigers” disciplinary deals with committee tigers if “flies”; with deals the procuratorate best be dealt with, the both to and flies are functions. agencies’ two the integrate to is way salary and benefits, and strengthening judicial salary judicial and strengthening and benefits, protection. anti-corruption current organs integrate Second, integrated and and establish an independent Corruption Against Independent Commission line of defense in social justice, in order to ensure ensure to in order in social justice, line of defense judicial corruption, prevent to judicial integrity, court the system justice, judicial realize to and could This take the lead in asset disclosure. could judges’ increasing for also be the justification spouses’ and children’s job positions, assets, assets, job positions, and children’s spouses’ the be included in should status and expatriate disclosure Starting this basis, from disclosure. the and reach accelerated, gradually should be l the judge is the last that Considering possible. 32

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 33 This new round of pilot programs indicates the the indicates of pilot programs new round This importance the reform, leaders to by attached more make prosecution to and the attempts pilot the previous to Compared independent. chief the of reforms in this round program, of 2004, 90% procuratorates in the country the had in procuratorates 90% 2004, of this practice. implemented the early helped solve experiments These internal many with too associated problems of the overburdening procedures, approval the lack of initiatives process, administrative improved which involved, of procurators efficiency and quality of case-handling. But the lack reform, for space the limited to owing of the efforts, the unwillingness of continued and power, relinquish leaders to procuratorate’s parts some in of professionalism of levels low the last decade of practice, over the profession, the chief procurator in most procuratorates, only was system responsibility/accountability superficially Only a small number implemented. because of case-load made progress of places cases and not enough many “too — pressure procuratorate because the — and procurators” the reform. to attention leaders paid more practice in ten provinces and municipalities, municipalities, and provinces ten in practice The Beijingincluding In and Shanghai. 2000, Three the Past in Reform Prosecution Opinion of case- the procurator’s “reforming proposed Years a fully establishing mechanism and handling responsibility/accountability chief procurator’s demanded Procuratorate Supreme The system.” starting that, January procuratorate the 2000, adopt the chief procurator all levels at directives more two In 2000, May system. Chief Opinion of Practicing The issued: were and Civil in System Responsibility Procurator Opinion The and Prosecution Administrative Responsibility Chief Procurator of Practicing was practice this and Investigation, in System the procuratorates. widely in implemented in the end of 2003, 2,897 procuratorates at As and 12,633 the country this practice, adopted By the end appointed. were chief procurators 1999, the Supreme Procuratorate launched a launched a Procuratorate 1999, the Supreme responsibility/accountability chief procurator’s procuratorates in Henan Province tried to let let tried to Province in Henan procuratorates Tangshan lead the case; and the the procurator of Hebei province procuratorates and Pingshan These responsibility. practiced chief procurator’s in so effects, had some positive experiments explored reform of the procurator’s responsibility of the procurator’s reform explored procuratorate Haidian example, For system. and prosecution “investigation in Beijing tried in Baiyun district procuratorate separation”; Guangzhou city tried the chief investigator’s case-handling; in responsibility main some The pilot program is not the first initiative of of is not the first initiative pilot program The the to in response this kind. 1990s, By the late of the Criminal challenges with the revision some local procuratorates Law, Procedure the shacklesbroke of the judicial structure and handling and enforcement oversight checks checks oversight handling and enforcement mechanism; strictly the approval implements or the the head of the procuratorate by system the determines and committee; prosecution salary and benefits of the chief procurator. mandates that other cases could be handled be handled could other cases that mandates chief the headed by the team by independently be will procurator chief the and procurator, In addition, the his/her decisions. for responsible builds a sound case- concretely Program Pilot exploration of forming a chief procurator’s office; office; a chief procurator’s of forming exploration of the chief procurator’s and the definition Apart powers from and limits of power. power the by and functions must be exercised that prosecution the or procuratorate the of head Program the Pilot law, by prescribed committee assistants, forming a case-handling team. a case-handling forming assistants, team. includes: the program of content specific The of the selection, removal or appointment, the set processes; through chief procurators and the organization of internal integration to launch this program in 17 procuatorates procuatorates in 17 program launch this to the to According in 2014. 7 provinces for several will have procuratorate each program, the main who will shoulder chief procurators Each procurator handling cases. for responsibility and procurators will be supported a few by illegal investigations; to ensure procuratorial procuratorial ensure to illegal investigations; the constraints and strengthen independence investigative over power of prosecutorial silent, remain to right a citizens allowing power; in the prescribed basic rights, citizens’ protecting time monitoring of investigative questioning to questioning to of investigative time monitoring supervision. post-fact and passive avoid agency the procuratory Although has made of oversight efforts strengthen continued to acts, to it is still difficult illegal investigative and it curtail such acts way, in a fundamental make judicial officials difficult to more is even to proven already are in cases that accountable the in instance, For handled. wrongly been have Gaopinguncle and nephew case of Zhang in in 2013, redressed which was Zhejiang province, be held detective” female “magic should the how procurator, should the police, How responsible? and the political-judicial committee judge, Responsibility all may responsibilities”? “share public is great if there nothing even to come dealt be must problem the Therefore, concern. of with the active promotion its root with at powers police Specifically, judicial reform. and strict legal liability should be weakened, of the costs increasing greatly imposed, and stipulated illegal evidence exclusion, and and exclusion, illegal evidence and stipulated personnel. relevant of system the avoidance Opinion furthered in more This the measures of Criminal in the new Code as mentioned detail, Procedure Criminal of Rules the and Procedure also Opinion The Procuratorate. People’s the of of strengthened in the area made progress supervision, of scope the expanded oversight, information, of obtaining the ways increased be must illegal evidence and made clear that curtail enough to not strong But it was excluded. in be done needs to More powers. investigative the procurators giving (1) areas: following the suggest disciplinary illegal to for power measures an explanation,” “requesting of only acts, instead (2) making punishment; weak a rather currently of illegal consequences clear the procedural illegally and firmly excluding investigations up the real- and (3) setting evidence; acquired oversight department with the power to request request department to with the power oversight unit; the investigation from explanations written issued The Opinion on Investigation Oversight Oversight Opinion on Investigation The issued Department Checking on Illegal Investigation Acts (Trial). It defined the methods and scope of illegal and the verification of investigation, acts; the investigation entrusted investigation inducement, illegal collection of evidence, evidence, of collection illegal inducement, cause of these The and extended detention. and an power lies in unbalanced problems the police. asymmetry favoring of power In October Procuratorate 2013, the Supreme have been directives such as the Provisions of of such as the Provisions been directives have Oversight (Trial) Establishing Criminal Case and of Questioning Criminal Suspects the Provisions their actual and Arrest, During Investigation illegal investigative reality, In was limited. effect of torture, in the form common quite acts were Investigation main is the Oversight of illegal investigation power which prosecutorial through form there Although powers. investigative constrains very different from the court, therefore it should it court, the from therefore verydifferent of court rationale the follow not necessarily operations. Illegal of Oversight Strengthening iii. independence of judicial officials. But because But because of judicial officials. independence responsibility procuratorate’s of the head of the of procuratorial nature and the administrative it is questionable whether the procurator power, or should be is rational system responsibility is procuratorate The paths. part reform of future is paid to improving the salary and benefits the salary improving is paid to and benefits initiative this In way, a procurators. chief to judge” “presiding the bears some similarities to different in court, they are yet pilot program the ensure expected to Both are in nature. procurator’s responsibility is clearer, and so is and so is is clearer, responsibility procurator’s the chief procurator, between the relationship of the department,the head the procuratorate, Inaddition, committee. prosecution the and to power “returning of and degree the extent attention and more is greater, the procurator” 34

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 35 of Procurators Capacity Building Opinion on Strengthening The criminal appeals. In March 2013 The Opinion Opinion The In 2013 criminal March appeals. Procuratory Improving and Strengthening of It issued. was in Criminal Appeals Function clarified the functionsresponsibilities of the and specific requirements, proposed procuratorate, should the procuratorate that and emphasized and compensation state promote earnestly Opinion provided The criminal victims. for relief work, future for guidance comprehensive further principles; vague through mostly but the case example, For is needed. improvement inquiry be better;and information should system mechanism should be in place; an open review stronger should provide documents response should be process the appeal review rationale; occur should review to responses streamlined; quickly; more should be of litigation oversight the connection with the people strengthened; these practicesmonitoring should be improved; be implemented. should and case accountability Building Capacity the Strengthening vi. effective path towards justice in civil litigation. litigation. civil in justice towards path effective procuratorate’s the civil litigation, to Compared important intervention is more in administrative and the justice for as a safeguard litigation disparity is a great there when dignity of the law of the parties. In power of the litigation the long and positioning sensible be should there run, Oversight functions. distinction procuratory of weakened, be gradually should in civil litigation and its main function should in civil litigation bring actionbe to support or public interest the state. on behalf of litigation Strengthening Procuratory Function v. in Criminal Appeals Revised The and Law Criminal Procedure The (Trial) Rules proposed Criminal Procedure in the procuratorate for higher standards intervention of the procuratorate must be be must procuratorate the of intervention of an imbalance avoid to limited reasonably private of the parties’ and the invasion power and strengthening implementation The rights. sue is the most of the rights to oversight Against the background of rather serious serious of rather the background Against giving the oversight, and insufficient corruption certain in civil litigation powers procuratorate impactpositive has had some in oversight civil litigation But ultimately enhancing justice. parties, between matter and the is a private power, scope, and effectiveness in discovery in discovery and effectiveness scope, power, parties’ for condition the and clear, not are These broad. is too oversight for application of role controversial the to related are problems in civil litigation. the procuratorate supervision unit, and also there is an open supervision is an open and also there unit, These adjudication. case during hearing of make the exercise helpful to are provisions are but there sensible, more procuratory power the procuratorate’s instance, For too. problems improved the feasibility of civil litigation of civil litigation the feasibility improved for conducive proved and therefore oversight, The perform to its functions. the porcuratorate respectively the filing and handling of cases are and appealing of the accusing responsibilities supervision unit and the civil and administrative (Trial). It defined the scope, conditions, means, means, (Trial). conditions, It the scope, defined of civil litigation functions, and procedures the for It provided oversight. procuratory can and the cases that the processes, conditions, directive This procuratory oversight. apply for iv. Strengthening Procuratory Procuratory Strengthening iv. Litigation Oversight in Civil Procuratorate 2013, the People’s In November Litigation of Civil Oversight Provisions The issued Constitution; protecting a lawyer’s rights and and rights a lawyer’s protecting Constitution; the ensure to presence lawyer’s a promoting lastly, and is restrained; powers of police exercise adjudication independent ensuring a judge’s judicial independence. and enhancing In addition, in May 2013, The Detailed Rules of of DetailedRules The 2013, InMay in addition, The Inspection and Procuratorate’s the Supreme and Administrative Civil of Conduct for Code strengthening issued aiming at were Procurators supervision. internal In2014, procuratorate’s the on three will focus Procuratorate the Supreme transparency, deepen reform: pilot projects to and the people’s accountability, procurator system. monitor and gradually increasing the practice of of practice the increasing gradually and open and open adjudication, open hearing, the 2013, In December verification. evidence its working revised Procuratorate Supreme on improving the emphasis increased rules and and publicizing online through transparency and building new open media platforms, inquiry, transparency. through oversight promoting procuratory transparency, trial to Compared more progressing be to seemed transparency measures It the pilot reform that is hoped slowly. and country, the entire to soon spread would be expanded. of transparency would the scope be should and results processes procuratory All cases. those classified as secret for open, except public reports, the to responses In particular, and cases, of high profile handling and outcomes published. be should documents procuratory not making liabilityThe for the should-be-open be clarified. public needs to procuratory process Circumstances. It emphasized strengthening It strengthening emphasized Circumstances. documents prosecution in used rationales the started in five procuratorates. Some provincial Some provincial started procuratorates. in five implementing followed, also procuratorates For exploratory transparency measures. procuratorate the Hainan provincial example, issued Implementation Opinions of Deepening New Under Transparency Procuratory Transparency was published, and Guangdong and Guangdong published, was Transparency first. ranked In October procuratorate provincial for Reform of Pilot Plan Working The 2013, was Transparency Deepening Procuratory Political- the Central by and approved reviewed reform Transparency Judicial Committee. at the national conference of chief procurators, procurators, chief of conference national the at in that indicated Procuratorate Supreme the the public online anti-corruption to response in building be proactive it would movement In 2013, micro-blog. February the procuratorate Procuratory Reportthe first Annual of China’s vii. Advancing vii. Procuratory Transparency transparency is a good remedy Procuratory and oversight procuration strengthening for efforts More were its integrity. promoting in 2013. In Januarymade in this regard 2013, 2013, The Capacity Building Plan of Basic Level of Basic Level Capacity Building Plan The 2013, of 2014-2018 reiterated Procuratorates People’s is the goal of procurators’ professionalism that development. future with practical legal experience. This measure measure This with practical legal experience. become and should be carried out immediately selection. It of procurator the main channel eventually and improved be to continue will lawyers mechanism where establish a transfer In December and judges. procurators become Accelerating the Six-Point Capacity Building Capacity Building the Six-Point Accelerating in that emphasized which issued, was Project should be selected procurators young the future agencies, judicial from an open process through and people legal experts lawyers, and scholars, of Procurators, issued in May 2013, laid out a laid out a 2013, in May issued of Procurators, in six building professionalism direction for selectionaspects: and and training, education job and exchange, interaction appointment, and self management, optimized security, Opinion of The Shortlymonitoring. thereafter, 36

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 37 oversight; gradually expanding services to services expanding gradually to oversight; subject five who are to suspects or defendants In June 2013 the Ministry of Justice issued In the Ministry June 2013 issued of Justice Aid Legal Promoting Further of Opinion the efforts redouble in to which proposed Work, aspects: strengthening in four legal aid work securing aid; functionslegal of regulatory the capacity and building; advancing funding; regions developed less to aid special providing the While available. are lawyers fewer where legal aid work Opinion made some progress, such as in areas be furthercould improved the or prosecutor, the police, the if accountability a establishing court the accused; inform to failed groups expanding and practice; duty” on “lawyer aid. for targeted of the legal aid system measures reform Future aspects . First, the following consider could and responsibility emphasizing government judicial legal aid from decoupling gradually could Specific measures agencies. administration financial input; publicizing include: increasing strengthening and funds aid legal of use the as public well as monitoring administrative The Provisions is helpful for implementing the the implementing is helpful for Provisions The Law articles in the new CriminalProcedure and the human rights protection regarding It also a defense. to right the of protection the operability criminal of legal aid in increased oversight, a lack of effective to But owing cases. its effectiveness and accountability, incentives, is no and there is much compromised, in reality poor quality of legal basic change in the current aid in criminal cases.

3 3. http://www.legaldaily.com.cn/bm/content/2013-09/13/content_4847942.htm?node=20730 or defendant; defined the procedure for the the for defined the procedure or defendant; opinions and a different raising applicant the and stated procedure; complaint grievance the division of functions the police, between the court, and legal-aid agencies. procuratorate, for the eligibility for legal aid and laid out laid out legal aid and the eligibility for for clarified standards process; the application specific and“other hardship of economic in certain that cases legal required conditions”; a criminal suspect to aid must be provided revised local legal-aid regulations. The number number The local legal-aid regulations. revised working in legal aid reached of professionals the country. 14,000 throughout in Criminal Litigation Aid of Legal Provision 2013. It issued in February was provided respectively. The funding provided totaled 6.6 6.6 totaled funding provided The respectively. annual increase billion yuan, with an average of 24%. In 2013 alone legal aid the year rate Twenty- yuan. million 1,500 exceeded funding or adopted regions provincial-level eight 2013 was the 10th anniversary of the the 10th anniversary2013 was of the In Ordinance. Aid of the Legal promulgation legal promulgated, was it since years ten the and aid handled 5.13 million cases nationwide with an legal consultations, 39 million provided of 20% and 11.5%, rate annual increase average and strengthening of lawyers’ professionalism professionalism of lawyers’ and strengthening management. Improvement Aid Work i. Legal Reforms in judicial administration reflected reflected in judicial administration Reforms work, in legal-aid a pilot project improvements on evidence-based criminal correction methods, IV. Reforms Measures in Judicial Judicial in Measures Reforms IV. Administration about lawyers’ professional ethics. In November In November ethics. professional about lawyers’ conducted an 2013 the Beijing Bar Association Li Mr. case of rape the into investigation official of violation possible and defense related the and conduct his attorney. of code by the professional NGOs’ participation and full collaboration with participation with and full collaboration NGOs’ and should be fostered professionals research evaluation Sixth, a comprehensive introduced. Experimental groups the results. is needed for can be set up for groups control and contrast visits with social follow-up combined research, of the gain an objective assessment so as to correction. of effectiveness Professionalism the Strengthening iii. of Lawyer Management lawyers of regulation and monitoring The in 2013. In be strengthened April to continued issued the Opinion Bar Association the National Ethics Honesty and Professional of Lawyers’ be professionalism lawyers’ ItBuilding. required of responsibility the management improved; the Bar firms be strengthened; the heads of law disciplinary and be enhanced; role Association’s punished. illegal and dishonest practice severely a debate Li triggered case of high profile Mr. The The new type of evidence-based correction new typeThe of evidence-based correction experience the pilot project learn should from for on searching and focus countries of other this to adjust to ways practical and effective to needs in China. Attention the conditions the first, the following: to be paid specifically should be done by and pilot work research Second, types crimes. of different identifying requirements puts significant the new method and training therefore, on correction officers; change conceptual the for needed are education the of core the Third, and capacity building. upon evidence Valid new method is“evidence.” which correction be plans will be made must legal means and scientific collected through collection evidence methods Fourth, evaluation. and correction plans should be continually so as to and improved revised, reviewed, Fifth, out lessons in a timely manner. draw to humanitarian correction, thereby reducing reducing humanitarian correction, thereby to rate. the recidivism from the person’s correctible behavior, then then correctible behavior, the person’s from achieve apply it under practical to conditions developed method new a is This results. best the a reflects which years, recent in internationally the state by shift punishment from conceptual prison. The Opinion laid out the objective, task, Opinion laid out the objective, The prison. of and safeguards steps, content, principle, the project. Evidence-based correctional work when dealing with the correction means that work out will the correction officer of criminals, collected a correction plan based on evidence Projects In 2013 the Ministry September issued of Justice Evidence-based a Guiding Opinion of Pilot nine in Certain and identified Correction Prisons Yancheng the pilot project, including prisons for should relax its restrictions and encourage and and its restrictionsand encourage should relax so as to involvement support such organizations’ justice. achieve people to make it easier for Pilot ii. Evidence-Based Correction and established connections with over 50 law 50 law and established connections with over A and NGOs. legal aid organizations, firms, aid network legal is takingnationwide shape, law interest for public but it is extremely difficult government The register. to and NGOs institutes For instance, the Major Case Legal Aid Network Network Aid Legal Major the Case instance, For Judicial Advanced the Institute For by organized has Technology Beijing of Studies Institute of legal professionals 300 volunteer over attracted It of operation. in less than six months has legal consultations 3,000 free over provided various foundations’ involvement; and inspiring and inspiring involvement; various foundations’ sense of social and legal professionals’ lawyers non-governmental years, In recent responsibility. have professionals and legal organizations important aid. increasingly in legal an role played years or more imprisonment; establishing a full- establishing imprisonment; or more years with feedback mechanism, lawyer time legal-aid the quality legal of improve to and evaluation supporting and encouraging Second, aid. legal aid organizations; non-governmental funds and restrictions on private relaxing 38

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 39 lawyers, and enhance lawyers’ social status. The The social status. lawyers’ and enhance lawyers, service a in building lawyers’ using at attempt started law ruled by in the 1980s. government forms, various taken has this years Over the legal advisory government such as the board, legal advisors, as government lawyers engaging Decision called for The and as public lawyers. advisor mechanism as a a legal “establishing purchase and government practice,” general of way services effective an is lawyers’ of this call. implementing the government act according to law, improve improve law, to act according the government and the government between the relationship In addition, the National Bar Association is is In Bar Association addition, the National drafting the Guiding Opinion of Promoting Service, Legal of Lawyers’ Purchase Government a certainwhich when issued will to extent help in the lawyers’ profession and self-governing of self-governing and of profession in the lawyers’ should agencies administrative Judicial lawyers. with replaced be and gradually out phased be healthy a create will which management, micro of the legal development the for environment profession. realize true self-governing of the profession. profession. true self-governingthe of realize trade of lawyers the reform In the future, based should be management professionalism to right of lawyers’ protection on the effective true self-discipline toward move so as to practice, protection of lawyers’ rights to practice. At At practice. rights to of lawyers’ protection the focus between is a deviation there present, and the spirit of the of the bar association protection is ineffective there When Decision. associations’ the bar practice, right to of lawyers’ and cannot is restrained role management oversight of lawyers’ unethical behavior. But in But in unethical behavior. of lawyers’ oversight insufficient are there where situation, the current practice and right to lawyers’ for safeguards frequently and rights are their personal safety effective the priority to should be given violated, rights to practice and strengthen punishment punishment practice strengthen and rights to of illegal and mechanism and prevention Owing the uneven to unethical practice.” the country, the quality throughout of lawyers in has a certain play to Bar Association role and the professionalism trade strengthening trade professionalism oversight. professionalism trade Plenary of Session Third the of Decision The Committee Party Central the 18th Communist of lawyers’ protection improve “to proposed In the same month, the National Bar Association In Bar Association National the same month, the oversight professionalism the trade established Some local bar associations committee. Bureau the Justice example, For suit. followed City Bar Chongqing and city, Chongqing of lawyers’ supervisors 22 engaged for Association support, and five strategies forming the path of of formingpath the support, strategies five and implementation. system reform, promoting technology and and technology promoting reform, system public improving applications, information stability and advocating about law, education and enhancing capacity building, the rule of law, of level modernization the raising effectively the reflected steps These political and legal work. importance leadership attaches the central great the implement better to but reforms, legal to of judicial plan the new round Decision, better system substantive advance and better reform, worked be must design top-level a reform, moves the reform that will ensure out that overall the pivotal in the right direction from of over Based on the experience perspective. with combined thirty reform, judicial of years judicial practice and our reflection common top-level a reform, judicial overall China’s of some provide to is recommended design reform The of judicial reform. the next round ideas for in can be summarized design recommended which serve as the pairs of relationships, five of key framework, six guarantees fundamental The Third PlenaryThird Sessionthe 18th Communist of The opened a new chapter Committee Party Central in judicial reform and laid out the direction for the first for Xi Jinping attended the next decade. Conference Political-Judicial time the Central stressed of 2014, and held in the beginning justice, fair the law, of strict enforcement strengthening and reforms, deepening actively to political and legal work and improving Meng of the people. the vital interests safeguard Political-Judicial head of the Central Jianzhu, called which plan, work the out laid Committee, deepening judicial governance, innovative for abolished. abolished. In judicial administration, the scope of legal aid of legal aid In the scope judicial administration, a pilot project of evidence-based expanded, was professional the and launched, was correction The strengthened. of lawyers management of re-educationsystem finally labor was through right direction. The procuratorate redoubled its its redoubled procuratorate The right direction. anti-corruption efforts, established mechanisms strengthened illegal investigations, prevent to and civil litigation criminal appeal procuration transparency. and enhanced procuration, a plan. to according going forward was Reform gained more attention. Political phrases like“the phrases Political attention. gained more of Policies fading out. were supremacies” three were mediation judicial activism coercive and weakened. in the in small steps is moving Judicial reform strengthening enforcement, improving case case improving enforcement, strengthening between relationships mitigating evaluation, and enhancing capacity judges and lawyers, enhance to made efforts were Great building. independence judicial and credibility, judicial and the prevention of wrongly handled cases, handled cases, of wrongly and the prevention the entry made the new round for were points measures by supplemented of judicial reform, of trial power, exercise such as the better jury panel and the the collegial advancing mechanism, case guiding the improving system, In 2013 the new chief of the Supreme Court, Court, In Supreme 2013 the new chief of the undertook He a series office. took Zhou Qiang, speech in of actions based on Xi Jinping’s of the 30th anniversary of commemoration transparency, Judicial the 1982 Constitution. Overall Design of Judicial Reform Overall Design new a embarkon will China in reform Judicial journey in 2014. Conclusion 40

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 41 mechanism from a lawyer to a judicial judicial a to lawyer a from mechanism appointing of power Party’s The official. the chief of the court and removing and the the be changed to should procuratorate candidates. of recommending power adjudication of individual cases, which is the which is the of individual cases, adjudication the between relationship The basic principle. Partyand the judiciary should be positioned leadership. political and organizational at political- government functioncentral the of as should be purely judicial committee political policies (i.e., on judicial guidance a local political-judicial Whether leadership). is necessarycommittee should be studied and reconsidered. Establish a selection the judiciary. over of judicial officials in compliance committee expand Gradually of justice. with the laws the scale of selectionfrom of judicial officials transfer and establish a professional lawyers improved. improved. Party with the The should not interfere 1. The the political-judicial committee. 2. Reform leadership organizational the Party’s 3. Improve ii. Judicial Independence ii. Judicial correctly means handling Judicial independence judicial institutions between the relationship and the government, Party, and the Communist of the judiciary especially that local authorities, Party. and the Communist guideline is the basic Judicial independence Judicial institutions should the rule of law. for or organization any from be independent courts from individual; the lower independent the higher courts, the judge independent and The court judges. the of other and leaders from and funding organizational should provide state the for As independence. of that guarantees the judiciary between relationship and the Party, the the leadership of the Party, while adhering to judiciary the leadership over be should Party’s the public, should widely accept comments, and comments, should widely accept the public, the public can participate that should guarantee so as channels, appropriate through effectively the top-level the dialogue between facilitate to leadership and the public. People’s Congress establish a judicial reform reform judicial a establish Congress People’s No less than half of its members committee. and other public lawyers, should be scholars, judicial reform The civil society. from figures and any and plans, steps, design, agenda’s should be open to of effectiveness assessment reform? At present judicial reform is led by is led by judicial reform present At reform? Leading Reform Judicial System the Central China’s 2003. Considering in May formed Group, and the setup of the political framework current the National that it is suggested judicial system, conducive to advancing and protecting other other protecting and advancing to conducive society, the of a stabilizer As reforms. democratic mechanism in an can be a buffering judicature changes. of drastic era judicial and organize design who will Second, core area of legal reform. If judicial institutions If institutions judicial reform. of legal area core it means the basic can function effectively, and is in place; of constitutionalism framework and system legal accepted commonly a when it will be established, are constitutionalism seek dispute resolution and justice through through and justice resolution seek dispute a In defined by an era rules and procedures. most the is law of rule the consensus, of lack about Consensus consensus. fundamental is and procedures and its rules judicature is the Judicial reform achieve. easy to relatively system reform, and social stability. stability. and social reform, system priority should be given as legal reform First, is Judicature the entry political reform. for point an act parties in which judicial institutions and (I) Five Relationships (I) Five Reform of Judicial Arrangement i. Strategic the with deals arrangement Strategic political judicial reform, between relationship independent anti-corruptionindependent commission. sue. right to and parties’ powers; the judicial writ practice could be be the judicial writ practice could powers; adopted. main function their is procurators; of state public prosecution. disciplinary and the Party’s procuratorate and and establish a general committee, collegial panel or the sole presiding judge. 4. 4. judge. panel or the sole presiding collegial courts of the management Abolish according and the judge performance data to appraisal statistical should be for data Relevant system. be paid has to purposes only and if attention 4. Protecting the lawyer’s right to practice law practice law right to the lawyer’s 4. Protecting of the relationship the internal Straighten case instruction the 1. Abolish courtfollows: as higher court the The influence could practice. court judiciary-levellower through oversight, courtand the lower can support the higher court file management, statistics, of sheriffs, in terms Apart these, from technology. and information the higher between “relationship” is no there function The of the Supreme courts. 2. and lower The Court should be judicial policy guidance. vigorously be should mechanism case guiding and the number of quasi-legislative developed 3. reduced. gradually judicial interpretations the within relationship internal the Straighten of the the power weakening court by system abolishing court the tribunal, of the head and the expanding committee, the adjudication and adequately of the sole trial judge, scope the by adjudication independent guaranteeing relationship among judicial institutions and and judicial institutions among relationship Decision the Although divisions. their internal judicial powers between the division stressed a coordination, and their and responsibilities and checks emphasize should structure sound Measures coordination. and disregard balances could include: optimal configuration for and strictly investigation restrain Weaken 1. the position to should return 2. Prosecutors the anti-corruption functions3. Integrate of the the People’s Congress and the best way to to and the best way Congress the People’s the rule of law. abide by representative body of public opinion so as to body of public opinion so as to representative for best way The the people. to be responsible representative the to court the obedient be to independently cases adjudicate to is body and the Constitution to and fairly according support ultimate of the be will This law. the Constitution Court. Constitution Legislation Congress. report the People’s to the people. of the will and intent from comes the enacted by the law Strictly enforce comprehensive review of administrative acts administrative of review comprehensive acts. including abstract administrative or Commission with the Constitution begin committee of the court of the committee and the court leaders independent judges’ protect fully so as to adjudication. Optimizing the judicial structure of functions Optimizing the judicial structure of functions the correctlyhandle is aimed at power and iv. Optimize the Judicial Structure of of Structure Judicial the Optimize iv. Functions and Power 3. Do not request the court to submit a work court the 3. Do not request submit a work to 1. Entrust the court with greater powers for for powers the court1. Entrust with greater and system review 2. Establish a constitutional way to ensure the faithful implementation the faithful implementation ensure to way of establish a system is to of the Constitution recommendations Specific review. constitutional include: is constitutional. The Decision specifically Decision specifically The is constitutional. legal authority the safeguard “to mentioned the further“to improve Constitution,” the of mechanism and the procedure monitoring raise to and implementation, of Constitution best The a new level.” to constitutionalism iii. Judicial Review iii. Judicial Review correctly the relationship handles Judicial review and the the executive, among the judiciary, branch executive the that ensure to legislature legislation and that law the to actsaccording 4. Strictly restrain the power of the Party the Party of the power 4. Strictly restrain 42

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 43 way judicial independence will not intensify will not intensify judicial independence way of the problem solve help to but will corruption, corruption. secure taken to be to need steps following The practice is that judicial funding is by central central is by funding judicial practice is that unified which provides budget, government for Decision advocated The funding security. and finance, of personnel, unified management courts local procuratorates and for materials funding provincial This level. provincial below In the long run, measure. is only a transitional to should be transferred funding provincial as soon as funding budget government central possible. iii. Safeguarding Fairness and Justice Serious judicial unfairness and corruption issues of uncertainty:are if and when judicial will judicial corruption is realized, independence In worse? actual even fact,become judicial not necessarily are and corruption independence and judicial independence Safeguarding linked. separate two curbing are judicial corruption independence, judicial advancing While issues. protection and accountability, oversight, judicial In this the same time. at must be strengthened Ensuring security of personal safety protects protects safety security personal Ensuring of dangers while hidden officials from judicial their Immunity for perform they duties. their performing actionsa are is they duties while to judicial officials according privilegeacting for from be free includes the right to and that law, actstheir speech while and for prosecution legal they performing Furthermore, their legal duties. in courtmatters testify to no obligation for have performance the to of their duties. related ii. Funding Security basis of judicial activities. is the material Funding can be One of the key factors of whether there judicial of impartialand independent exercise on whether judicial funding depends power of local the financial control from can be free In the common authorities. most countries And their salariesAnd should be higher than those of civil servants. they cannot be fired or their salarythey cannot be fired and benefits will This reasons. without legitimate reduced being mistreated judicial officials from protect simply performing Judicial for their duties. seriesmanagement a of have should officials ranking. administrative from separate systems protection, protection of personal safety, and and of personal safety, protection protection, the legal actionsimmunity they performed for means the appointment This during their tenure. of judicial officials must be done and removal and with statutory conditions, in accordance prosecution functions and for judicial officials to functions judicial officials prosecution and for legally. and independently powers their exercise should systems and scientific A set of reasonable selection, judicial officials’ be established for It and discipline. should be appointment, identity enjoy officials judicial that clear made i. Job Security Judicial job security and is a basic premise officials to a necessary judicial for condition performcorrectly and effectively trial and enforcement of the verdict. Alternative dispute dispute Alternative of the verdict. enforcement and enable the should be developed resolution path. its own have public to (II) Six Securities and Safeguards judicial final settlement should be recognized should be recognized judicial final settlement the Therefore establish judicial authority. to and re-trialpractice of petition, appeal, must “enforcement of problem the changed; be ensure to must be solved difficulty and chaos” The final resolution by judicial decision means means decision judicial by final resolution The between the relationship correctly handling the judiciary and other dispute-resolution is the last Judicial resolution mechanisms. and the principle of of social justice, defense to data or figures, the most important data important most the data figures, or data to because it directly rate the acquittal should be independent court’s of the reflects the degree adjudication. by Judicial Decision Final Resolution v. The principle of protecting the disadvantaged principle the disadvantaged of protecting The efforts Reform underpins judicial accessibility. Improve 1. include: should measures and the threshold lower legal aid mechanisms, greater democracy, including judicial democracy. judicial democracy. including democracy, greater jury form The is the most significant system Chinese the current Yet democracy. of judicial jury practice is facing some serious issues that particularlyproblem the be resolved, need to and no participation presence in trial.” “mere of this issue is a lack of incentives cause of root The participate to and jurors for and safeguards an impact of a case. on the adjudication have of the the experience before, mentioned As should countries jury law of common systems as the participatory upon, as well be drawn and countries, law of continental system jurors the resolve so as to conditions, China’s applied to of the superficialproblems jury and presence take part. to the public lacking Efforts incentives change that systemic should be made towards judicial democracy maximize aims to and to establish a jury in suits conditions that system China. vi. Protection of the Disadvantaged approaches; improve alternative dispute dispute alternative improve approaches; as mediation, such mechanisms resolution review; reduce and administrative arbitration, and tryjudicial demand effective achieve to judicial Expend 2. disputes. of diversion manner;reasonable and scientific in a resources claims small and procedures simplified improve streamline scope; the application and expand of ordinary trial; first and second procedures management the adjudication 3. Improve conducttriage a sound of cases to system; 4. Make full use of delays. procedural avoid and human resources; means; save technological work. paperless office implement Safeguarding Democracy v. is a deficiency there in In China today, enjoy should be able to people The democracy. diverse system of dispute resolution; properly properly resolution; of dispute system diverse bridge and non-litigation the litigation efficiency is a dimension that cannot be ignored in efficiencyignored cannot be is a dimension that of the reform. design the top-level judicial efficiency increase the following To a develop Vigorously be done: 1. things could with the economical and effective use of judicial use of judicial and effective with the economical a period of social China is undergoing resources. development, economic with rapid transformation judicial inadequate and disputes, numerous more are there challenge is that The resources. safeguarding Therefore cases than hands available. iv. Safeguarding Efficiency iv. Like safeguarding denied. is justice delayed Justice efficiency increasing is also an fairness and justice, Judicial efficiencyobjective deals of judicial reform. in criminal litigation, put an end to joint case- joint in criminal put an end to litigation, and the the prosecutor, the police, handling by 6. Prevent court; illegal evidence. strictly exclude its root targeting the miscarriage by of justice accountability, strengthen causes in the system; compensation. state and improve sentencing for similar cases to promote a unified promote similar cases to for sentencing adversary-based 4. Improve judicial practice. sanctions and apply tougher judicial process neutral to 5. Adhere violations. procedural for of parties treatment equal ensure adjudication, and apply the principle of reciprocity; especially a mere formality. The website for publicizing publicizing for website The formality. a mere should be built quickly documents verdict and transparency should be comprehensive there guiding 3. Promote documents. of verdict define sentencing; case practice; standardize similar for strive discretionary powers; judges’ three major transparency platforms: adjudication adjudication major transparency platforms: three of verdict publication online procedure, information. enforcement and documents, for accountability and responsibility Clarify be should that materials for non-publication become publicizing does not so that publicized, judicial fairness and justice: 1. Combat judicial judicial 1. Combat judicial fairness and justice: especially oversight; and strengthen corruption and lawyers to protection adequate providing by to incentive the most as they have their clients, transparency 2. Promote matters. judicial oversee the implementing expeditiously in a holistic way, 44

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 45 approach, and there is still considerable room room is still considerable and there approach, political and under the current even reform for judicial framework. confined to an advisory role. More could be be could an advisory More to confined role. such of judicial job security, done in the area more judicial officials, of as position rotation the separate lawyers, judges selected from administrative from decoupling judges for titles of higher implementation gradual ranking, of judges and promotions judges, salaries for is example Another etc. seniority, to according of the courtthe optimization structure, system courtsand lower higher on which involves regions and courtsvertical of different level, as as well and jurisdiction level, on horizontal the division of functions among departments to this The obstacles court. and staff within the the courts from mainly come themselves. reform Itbut appears very to achieve actually it difficult the court, judge and especially the only involves So long as the “leaders.” of court the interests judiciary particularly and Court the Supreme possible to entirely it is mind, up its makes the court setup gradually. optimize system this following solved be could problems Many capitalism has never had a monopoly on judicial had a monopoly has never capitalism Socialist independence judicial independence. capitalist superior all means to be by could actual The in experience judicial independence. judicial independence exactly why China shows fairness and realize to is much needed independence Decision stressed The justice. which in essence trial, and in adjudication judicial independence. enhances an important advancing tactic for Therefore deal challenges, differentiate is to judicial reform the easier ones and attack with them in stages, realize to difficult be may it instance, For first. within a short all judicial period the goal that central the through financed be will funding do this at to it is feasible yet budget, government the adjudication before Also level. the provincial functions its be is abolished, could committee China’s specific country conditions. Actually, Actually, specific country conditions. China’s for them to manipulate the judiciary and the judiciary manipulate them to and for or investigated be even could interference opponents Yet legal liabilities. for prosecuted high-sounding have always judicial reform to name of socialism and in the such as pretexts some others are imagined difficulties. imagined some others are the control obstacles” “institutional Through can be seen. Judicial groups of certain interest will primarilyindependence damage the making of some officials, it difficult interests differentiated and dealt with accordingly. Some and dealt with accordingly. differentiated realistic, are imaginaryare difficulties and some degrees. of different ones are and the realistic in judicial reform Most difficulties encountered groups; obstructioninterest the of from come Identifying the difficulties impeding judicial the difficulties impeding judicial Identifying movement reform the entire or even reform in the country deservesanalysis. specific effortsRetracting because of difficulties reform be is not an option. Difficulties should in general are long-term goals that could be broken be broken could goals that long-term are can be objectives that realistic more into down in the short step by step term. realized Challenges i. Differentiating compensation for crime victims. for compensation (III) Tactics Five be carried will design top-level out in two The six protections and relationships the five steps: mechanisms, especially for crime victims. Pay Pay crimevictims. for especially mechanisms, with criminal this reform combining to attention the social it into and integrate mediation relief security Set reasonable raise and system. state to make the transition funds and gradually of eligibility, expand the scope of service, service, of the scope expand of eligibility, gradually quality the of legal aid, improve judicial from aid agencies legal decouple of formation encourage and administration, the funding and aid organizations NGO legal judicial relief and improve 2. Reform of NGOs. is a fundamental and long-term task. Without Without task. and long-term is a fundamental the best high-quality even legal professionals promoting Therefore, cannot work. system being paid to attention requires judicial reform to gather consensus and momentum for the the for momentum and consensus gather to make the Specific suggestions: first, reform. advisory documents, reports, reform reform evaluations result and progress, and agendas various online the public through to available the public has the right second, platforms; of process fully participateto in the entire suggestions, and comments including reform, setting, agenda and consultation, research observation, process and opinion collecting, down break third, evaluation; effectiveness judicial reform private encourage taboo areas, and form to institutes and related research Congress People’s function;National fourth, the commission should establish a judicial reform as the decision-making the national body for with the participation judicial reform, of private and the public. entities Legal of Quality the Improving v. Professionals quality the professionals Improving of legal court leaders being prohibited from interfering court from prohibited leaders being The the case. of adjudication with a judge’s Decision,the in as such mentioned measures system, committee the adjudication of reform and court levels, clarifying various functions at of the oversight level adjudication the defining courts important higher and lower are initiatives within interference administrative eliminate to the court itself. Momentum Gathering iv. is momentum forward reform judicial push To and confidence the above, from needed; resolve a long time both quite for Yet below. from lacking. Opening up and broadening were public participation can in judicial reform and determined help the leadership be more so as hopeful and confident the public more enhance independence: the higher court higher the being independence: enhance court; interfering from with the lower prohibited local Party organization or government is is government or Party organization local the leaders of the oftenimposed through can start reform judicial with Therefore, court. of the court independence internal and judges, to interference of administrative elimination especially starting within the court. The court court The especially starting within the court. about numerous and judges often complain but most of this interference interferences, within the court from from comes system: the head of the court or higher or tribunal, the the judge by courts. Interference over Full judicial independence seems extremely seems extremely judicial independence Full can be that it is a goal yet achieve, difficult to In the short in stages. realized judicial term, enhanced, be gradually could independence technical matters. Hence de-politicalizing de-politicalizing Hence matters. technical be an important could tactical judicial reform into turn of China in transition the reality to way in the future. rule of law real iii. Starting with the Court Itself some of the difficulties and obstacles could be be could obstacles and difficulties the of some such as the non-interference defused, effectively individual to the political-judicial committee by socialist and even judicial independence, cases, as processed be all could which law, of rule theoretically almost all other problems could could almost all other problems theoretically By issues. and technical be discussed as legal our way and changing free setting our minds of thinking, political and ideological some be transformed could of reform “taboo areas” thus issues of legal governance, technical into to separate judicial from political reform and and political reform judicial from separate to angles, technical legal and from reform advance for Except be found. could space then greater principle of the socialist path the fundamental Party, of the Communist and the leadership ii. De-Politicizing judicial reform judicial ii. De-Politicizing described is sometimes as reform Judicial is it Why a fortified position.” “attacking Iffortified? non- Because it is politicized. deployed and tacticspolitical techniques were 46

Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 Annual Report on China’s Judicial Reform 2013 47 the next ten years will launch a groundbreaking a groundbreaking will launch the next years ten starting reform, reinforcing with journeyreal of establishing to moving trial independence, and then expeditiously judicial independence, and authoritative, efficient, a just, to proceeding modern socialist judicial system. independent eliminating local and administrative interference. interference. local and administrative eliminating in the judicial system that expect more even We the new round of judicial reform will carry a will carry of judicial reform the new round a China’s taking by account into vision, proceed systematic, a consider unique conditions, design, top-level effective and comprehensive, of issues key the on breakthroughs make and have had limited results, and the public is not the public is not and results, had limited have and judicial situation about the current happy was judicial reform In 2013 China’s its reform. efforts, with less arduous through attempted continue will voyage The results. than satisfying expect We of a rule of law. dream with China’s fairness and justice in every case” has become has become in everyfairness and justice case” one of the primary expectations of citizens. progress one cannot be optimistic about Yet lacking, are and public credibility justice where years many over authorityreforms the is lost, The rule of law in China has set an irreversible in China has set an irreversible rule of law The and in rule of law main trends The path. In China not change. will constitutionalism public and intensifying social conflicts are today “Experiencing increasing. is justice for demand and fostering underpinning justice concepts. concepts. underpinning justice and fostering affects citizens’ of legal professionals work The and even freedoms properties, reputations, high should have so legal professionals life, ethics. of professional standards the judicial environment in China. Second, in China. Second, the judicial environment reformed be thoroughly must legal education transitioning and planning long-tem through In and development. education legal career to the bar examination reforming the meantime, ethics emphasizing legal professional system, themselves; learning from the common law law the common learning from themselves; countryof selecting tradition judges from mechanisms and adopting transitional lawyers, These judicial officials. into lawyers transform to changing critical to changes are technical improving the quality of legal professionals. First, First, professionals. legal quality of the improving development career judicial a scientific forming the selection, emphasis on with special system, and security, job discipline, award, promotion, honor of sense a fostering system; retirement officials judicial and for a judicial career for