Many commenters in
the US and China are evaluating the pros and cons of introducing jury trials to
the Chinese judiciary system. This blog
made some preliminary comments on why the author feel why jury system is still premature for the Chinese Judiciary system, as compared to its US counterpart.
In the US, the
jury trial is warranted by the Fifth, the Sixth, and the Seventh Amendments of
the US Constitution. Jury system was
designed to protect the most fundamental rights of the citizens and to serve on
jury is in turn, a fundamental responsibility of a citizen. To have the same
level of protection in China is unrealistic, since amending the Chinese
Constitution is too complicated to the extent that it is literally impossible. But
without been guaranteed by Constitution, the effect of the jury system will be
compromised even if a specific law regarding jury system is enacted. Jury is composed of individual jurors, it is imperative
for the jurors to be able to stay objective.
However, because the legal education is not as pervasive as is in the
US, many jurors can be easily swayed by the attorneys. Moreover, the generally existed regional
discrimination and hatred towards the rich are also factors that may negatively
affect the objectiveness of the jurors. Therefore, selecting the jurors could
be a difficult task to perform in China.
Perhaps the
biggest challenges for a jury system in China come from the policy reasons. For example, the Chinese judicial system is
not an adversarial system. Instead of acting like a gatekeeper or moderator who
decides which evidence to adopt and which not, the judges in China are symbols
of justice which performs the function of punishing the crime. The pre-trial
investigation is much more emphasized than presenting evidence or examining
witnesses at trial. The window for the jury to learn enough about the case is
too slim for them to make an informed decision. Another policy reason is that
the Chinese judiciary heavily emphasizes the efficiency of the system. The US
jury trial can be a very long and complicated process. There are also chances
for mistrial. Moreover, the US judicial
system employs long pretrial procedure, which encourages settlement rather than
trial. This results in only 5%
of the cases that actually went to trial.
But in China, about 80%
of the cases went to trial. Therefore,
there is a great burden to find enough jury and pay them for their services.
The fundamental reason
for employing the jury system in the US is to ensure the checks and balances.
But in China, the division of power is far less thorough than the US. Although
the independence of the judicial system is also advocated in Chinese
Constitution, but the reality is that all laws and regulations are implemented
under the guidance of the Communism Party. There is not enough balance of powers
to warrant an impartial jury system. Therefore, it may still be too early to
institute a jury system in China right now.
No comments:
Post a Comment