NCJ Number
44849
Journal
SUNDAY NEWS MAGAZINE, DETROIT NEWS Dated: (SEPTEMBER 18, 1977) Pages: 14-16,20,21
Date Published
1977
Length
5 pages
Annotation
TRIAL PROCEEDINGS FOR A TYPICAL CASE IN A COURT OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ARE DESCRIBED BY AN AMERICAN OBSERVER.
Abstract
THE CHINESE JUDICIAL SYSTEM HAS FOUR TIERS: THE SUPREME COURT OF CHINA; 26 PROVINCIAL HIGH COURTS; INTERMEDIATE COURTS; AND COUNTY OR DISTRICT COURTS. UNLESS A CRIME IS OF A HIGHLY SERIOUS NATURE (E.G., MURDER, RAPE, AN ACT AGAINST THE STATE), THE CASE USUALLY DOES NOT GO TO COURT. NINETY PERCENT OF ALL CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES ARE HANDLED BY CONCILIATION AND MEDIATION COMMITTEES COMPOSED OF ORDINARY CITZENS, WHO ARE USUALLY ACQUAINTED WITH THE DEFENDANT. THEY PROVIDE THE INVESTIGATION, INTERROGATION, DEFENSE, PROSECUTION, TRIAL, AND JUDGMENT; THEIR DECISIONS ARE SUBJECT TO APPEAL. THE PARTICULAR CASE OBSERVED WAS A MAJOR OFFENSE, THE THEFT OF STATE PROPERTY, SO IT WAS TRIED IN THE PEKING INTERMEDIATE PEOPLES COURT. THE DEFENDANT WAS BROUGHT IN AND ENCOURAGED TO CONFESS HIS CRIME. ALL WITNESSES TO THE CRIME WERE HEARD. THE DEFENDANT WAS ASKED THE ROOT CAUSE OF HIS CRIME (IN THIS CASE, HE SAID IT WAS THAT HE HAD BEEN CORRUPTED BY BOURGEOIS IDEAS) AND WHETHER HE HAD ANY OTHER CRIMES TO CONFESS. THE PEOPLE'S ADVOCATE (DEFENSE COUNSEL) AND PEOPLE'S ASSESSORS SPOKE, AND THEN THE DEFENDANT HAD TO LISTEN TO THE CRITICISM OF THE MASSES -- HIS FELLOW WORKERS AND NEIGHBORS. HE THEN GAVE A STATEMENT EXPRESSING HIS REMORSE AND DESIRE TO REFORM. THE DEFENDANT, PEOPLE'S ADVOCATE, PROSECUTOR, AND ASSESSORS LEFT THE ROOM, AND THE JUDGE ASKED THE OPINION OF THE 'MASSES' AS TO WHAT SHOULD BE DONE. INDIVIDUALS GAVE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE SENTENCE; ALL WHO WANTED TO SPEAK WERE HEARD. NEXT THE JUDGE MET SEPARATELY WITH THE ADVOCATE AND ASSESSORS, AND FINALLY RETURNED AND GAVE HER DECISION: THE DEFENDANT RECEIVED A 2-YEAR PRISON SENTENCE, WHICH WAS SUSPENDED. IT WAS CLEARLY THE COURT'S DECISION, BUT IT REFLECTED THE OPINION OF THE MASSES; THERE IS NO RELIANCE ON COURT PRECEDENT IN CHINESE LAW. THE JUDGE ADVISED THE DEFENDANT ON HIS RIGHT TO APPEAL, THEN GAVE ALL PRESENT A SUMMARY OF THE LESSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM THIS CASE.