NCJ Number
201125
Editor(s)
Hans-Jorg Albrecht,
Chen Guangzhong
Date Published
2002
Length
298 pages
Annotation
This Sino-German research on non-prosecution policies focused on identifying how the Chinese and German legal systems deal with the complex relationships among rule of law, procedural efficiency and control, and equal treatment of defendants in normative and practical terms.
Abstract
The study addressed the extent to which police and prosecutors use diversion and whether specific non-prosecution patterns can be identified. The study obtained statistical data on decisionmaking by public prosecutors or police. In addition, high-ranking prosecutors in the two countries, as well as the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong, were asked to assess several fictitious case scenarios in order to explore their attitudes toward the dismissal of cases without criminal trial or sentence. The two countries follow similar principles on prosecution policies. The principle of legality is the basic principle of prosecution in both countries; however, the law has been developed so as to allow the prosecutors discretion in deciding whether they should dismiss the case for reasons that are mainly in the public interest. In Germany all cases must be prosecuted if there is sufficient evidence, except when the law provides otherwise. Under Chinese law, the principle of legality is not as clearly stated as in German law. The primary discretionary power in non-prosecution cases in both countries pertains to minor offenses. In both countries there is the substantive prerequisite that requires a dismissed case to be a misdemeanor. This report gives attention to the extensiveness of the prosecutory discretion in the two countries and in Hong Kong, as well as the extent of dismissal by use of this allowable discretion in practice. Chapter notes