China to expand court assessors system as part of judicial reform
Increased efforts will also be made to ensure people’s right to participate in the legal process, official says
China has vowed to expand the scope of the court assessors system, allowing them to participate in more cases and clarifying their roles, a senior legal official said.
Jiang Wei, head of the Office of the Central Leading Group for Judicial Reform, also said today in a press briefing on revamping the nation’s legal system that increased efforts would be made to ensure people’s right to participate in the judicial process and that officials are kept from interfering into court proceedings.
The current system is flawed, Jiang said, because the number of court assessors is limited. The assessors have the same authority and power as judges in determining the application of laws and examining of facts in legal proceedings.
In a jury system, it is the jurors who are responsible for making judgments on facts and giving their verdict. The judges are responsible for application of law and imposing sentences.
Thus, in the assessors system, the distinction between the function and role of the judge and jury has vanished.
“To ask those assessors who do not have enough legal knowledge to get involved in determining the application of the laws will lead to a situation that the assessors [are] not willing to or do not dare to give their opinion,” Jiang said.
Changes will be made in order that assessors will not determine how the laws should be applied, but only examine facts of a case, he added.
Tong Zhiwei, a professor of East China University of Political Science and Law, said many assessors just followed the instructions of judges without careful examination because of a lack of legal knowledge.
“It is an attempt to push for more civil participation in judicial process if we expand the scope of cases where assessors can join, and only allow them to examine facts,” he said.
The Communist Party released detailed plans for strengthening rule of law on Tuesday as it pledged to give courts more independence.
It also said rule by the party should be maintained, and any legislation must be submitted to the party’s Central Committee for discussion and decisions if it involved major policy changes.
But Jiang said granting Chinese courts more authority does not jive with the concept of “judicial independence” in Western countries, which separate the powers of the legislature, judiciary and executive branch.
The courts and procuratorates in China report to and are supervised by the National People’s Congress, which is China’s legislature.
“In this context, the independent exercising of power of judgment according to law is different from the judicial independence,” he said.
He added that the reform plan was based on the conditions facing China and that there was no universal legal model that every nation should adopt.
Legal experts in China have long called for overhauling the country’s judicial system, which is beset by corruption and interference from authorities.
