Some 1,430,000 criminal verdicts at court of first instance were issued in 2022. Of those, 354 were not guilty judgments, the NGO Safeguard Defenders says.
Hard to make much out of this data. Does this mean the further collapse of judicial efficacy in China? Or does this more or less reflect a different typo of judicial system where prosecutors will only pursue when conviction is guaranteed like the Japanese system?
where prosecutors will only pursue when conviction is guaranteed like the Japanese system
As someone who lived in Japan, let me offer you an alternative view. The Japanese legal system is caught in a circular spiral of injustice, where the perception that prosecutors only bring charges if someone is guilty makes judges extremely unlikely to ever rule someone innocent. It’s extremely dangerous, because once charges are brought against you, it’s not an “innocent until proven guilty” system, it’s a, “They wouldn’t be charging you if you weren’t likely guilty, because they only pursue charges in the first place if you’re almost certainly guilty.” Here is a great interview with a pair of veteran Japanese criminal law professors about the problems with the system.
WRT China, given past data about conviction rates, this shift almost certainly indicates that they have now fully moved to a system in which there is no actual judicial review of innocence versus guilt. The judiciary only functions to hand out sentences. The government accusing you imparts guilt. They do not have an adversarial system in China (prosecutor vs defense), but an inquisitorial one, in which both judges and “assessors” interrogate accused parties, and then decide for themselves on guilt. The accused have no one who advocates for them, and often are not allowed to advocate for themselves at all.
The Japanese legal system is caught in a circular spiral of injustice, where the perception that prosecutors only bring charges if someone is guilty makes judges extremely unlikely to ever rule someone innocent.
That’s exactly what I mean. Basically from the data, it’s difficult to tell if China’s model follows this type of approach.
I agree, it’s a terrible system in Japan, but the Chinese judicial system has its own massive issues of an ineffective judicial system, and this data does not seem to give much of a context of why the prosecution conviction rates are so high.
My understanding of the Chinese criminal courts is that police refer “criminals” there, and the court tries them. It literally is a situation where if the court agrees to try you, you are (except for 0.3% of the cases) guilty. At least in Japan they note that 60% of cases are declined for prosecution entirely. I don’t get the impression that happens much in China without political connections.
Also this is terrifying. China’s court AI reaches every corner of justice system, advising judges and streamlining punishment
The system, powered by machine learning technology, automatically screens court cases for references, recommends laws and regulations, drafts legal documents and alters perceived human errors, if any, in a verdict.
As required by the supreme court, a judge must consult AI on every case. If the judge rejects the machine’s recommendation, the machine demands a written explanation for records and auditing.
Verdict enforcement has long been an issue for Chinese courts which have been deemed lacking in manpower. The court’s AI addresses it by finding and seizing the property of a convict almost instantly and putting it up for online auction.
Its electronic reach allows the smart court to work with China’s powerful “social credit system” to ban a person refusing to pay a debt from using a plane, high speed train, hotels or other social services.
In 2022, the total number of cases dropped during prosecution rose to 26.28%
So it does sounds like a significant portion of cases get dropped.
Again I’m not an expert on either system, but what I do know is that the judicial system is in dire need of reform in China, but it doesn’t seem like it will happen anytime soon.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !news@beehaw.org
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Hard to make much out of this data. Does this mean the further collapse of judicial efficacy in China? Or does this more or less reflect a different typo of judicial system where prosecutors will only pursue when conviction is guaranteed like the Japanese system?
As someone who lived in Japan, let me offer you an alternative view. The Japanese legal system is caught in a circular spiral of injustice, where the perception that prosecutors only bring charges if someone is guilty makes judges extremely unlikely to ever rule someone innocent. It’s extremely dangerous, because once charges are brought against you, it’s not an “innocent until proven guilty” system, it’s a, “They wouldn’t be charging you if you weren’t likely guilty, because they only pursue charges in the first place if you’re almost certainly guilty.” Here is a great interview with a pair of veteran Japanese criminal law professors about the problems with the system.
WRT China, given past data about conviction rates, this shift almost certainly indicates that they have now fully moved to a system in which there is no actual judicial review of innocence versus guilt. The judiciary only functions to hand out sentences. The government accusing you imparts guilt. They do not have an adversarial system in China (prosecutor vs defense), but an inquisitorial one, in which both judges and “assessors” interrogate accused parties, and then decide for themselves on guilt. The accused have no one who advocates for them, and often are not allowed to advocate for themselves at all.
That’s exactly what I mean. Basically from the data, it’s difficult to tell if China’s model follows this type of approach.
I agree, it’s a terrible system in Japan, but the Chinese judicial system has its own massive issues of an ineffective judicial system, and this data does not seem to give much of a context of why the prosecution conviction rates are so high.
My understanding of the Chinese criminal courts is that police refer “criminals” there, and the court tries them. It literally is a situation where if the court agrees to try you, you are (except for 0.3% of the cases) guilty. At least in Japan they note that 60% of cases are declined for prosecution entirely. I don’t get the impression that happens much in China without political connections.
Also this is terrifying.
China’s court AI reaches every corner of justice system, advising judges and streamlining punishmentFrom the article,
So it does sounds like a significant portion of cases get dropped.
Again I’m not an expert on either system, but what I do know is that the judicial system is in dire need of reform in China, but it doesn’t seem like it will happen anytime soon.