SCIO briefing on the Decisions of the 4th Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee
0 Comment(s)
Print
E-mail China.org.cn, October 30, 2014
Die Welt:
My first question is will you release the number of death sentences at the next meeting of the National People's Congress (NPC)? You stressed being open to the public at the meeting, but so far, there have been no such statistics. My second question is about amnesties or presidential pardons. In all the other rule-of-law societies, there are presidential pardons. What are the regulations in China?
Jiang Wei:
Regarding the number of death sentences, the statistics are kept by courts and not available to me, so I can't give you an answer right now. As for your second question, we have discussed and studied amnesties for a long time, but we haven't worked out specific measures that fit the special conditions of our country and our judicial system. Thank you.
Beijing Youth Daily:
You just mentioned improving the people's assessor system when you read the Decisions, but some people feel that currently, assessors just sit with judges and don't actually participate in trials. What specific measures will you take to ensure public participation? Thank you.
Jiang Wei:
The people's assessor system is the most immediate way for the public to participate in legal affairs and supervise judicial activities. It has played a positive role in our legal system, but also has some shortcomings.
The Decisions proposed improving the people's assessor system. Specifically, we will first expand the scope of cases applicable to the system and improve the methods of randomly selecting assessors. There are currently only a few assessors in courts at different levels. In some courts in particular, there are only a handful of them. They have almost become permanent assessors and haven't had many chances to really participate in trials. In view of this, the Decisions said that measures should be taken to guarantee the public the right to participate in court trials, expand the scope of cases applicable to the system, improve the methods to randomly select assessors, and enhance the credibility of the system.
Second, we will gradually stop assessors adjudicating the application of law and make them concentrate on fact finding only. Currently, assessors have the same rights as judges in the two areas, but for those without a great knowledge of law, it will make them unable, hesitant or unwilling to speak their mind and thus fail in their duties. Therefore, the Decisions proposed separating the duties of assessors and judges. Only in this way can assessors perform their duties adequately.
Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)