Models of Criminal Procedure System

Description

This book is an in-depth study on the criminal procedure in China. Using the social science research method, the author studies some systems and reforms, such as the criminal reconciliation, the sentencing procedure, the criminal incidental civil action, the trial hearing, the exclusionary rule and the defense system. The author puts forward some new theories and opinions. He points out that there are two modes of criminal procedure in China: the adversarial mode and the cooperative mode. He has advanced a new theory based on the practice of the procedure where the defendant pleads guilty or the parties reach a reconciliation. Also, the author has summarized three forms of criminal trial and three modes of criminal incidental civil action. He analyzes "conviction trial", "sentencing trial" and "procedural trial" and points out their defects. He holds that the coexistence of the three models of incidental civil action reflects some problems in the criminal procedure.   The criminal procedure has the problem of malfunction which refers to the fact that the procedure prescribed by the law is not effectively implemented. The author points out five sources of the process’s malfunction through factual and empirical analysis. He describes them as the "5 rules of malfunction of the criminal procedure". As for the criminal defense system, the author thinks that it not only has made great progress, but also has a great deal of problems. Also, the author puts forward a theory of coordinating defense which aims at rebuilding the relationship between the defense lawyer and the accused. China has established the exclusionary rule with its own characteristics. The author points out that the reformers should not only enact the rule,but also pay attention to its implementation. A series of judicial reforms will arrive, for which the exclusionary rule is the activator and the start.     Preface Contents Author and Translator About the Author Translator Part I Systems 1 Three Forms of Criminal Trials 1.1 Diversification of Criminal Trials 1.2 Conviction Trial 1.2.1 Nature of Conviction Trial 1.2.2 Reform of Conviction Trial 1.2.3 Litigation Structure of Conviction Trial 1.3 Sentencing Trial 1.3.1 Nature of Sentencing Trial 1.3.2 Sentencing Trial in Ordinary Procedure 1.3.3 Sentencing Trial in Summary Procedure 1.4 Procedural Trial 1.4.1 Nature of Procedural Trial 1.4.2 Procedure of Exclusionary Rule 1.4.3 Procedural Trial in Pretrial Meeting 1.5 Impacts of Three Forms of Criminal Trials 1.5.1 Conviction Prosecution, Sentencing Prosecution and Procedural Prosecution 1.5.2 Innocence Defense, Sentencing Defense and Procedural Defense 1.5.3 Three Objects of Proof 1.5.4 Three Identities of Investigators 2 Evolution and Reflection of File Transfer System 2.1 Evolution of File Transfer System 2.2 Pretrial File Transfer System in 1979 2.3 Trial Model Reform in 1996 2.4 Post-Trial File Transfer System 2.5 Reinstation of Pretrial File Transfer System 2.6 Several Deep-Seated Factors 2.6.1 Judicial Tradition of Judges Leading Evidence Investigation in Court 2.6.2 Trial Model Centered on Case Files 2.6.3 Making Verdicts Outside of Court 2.6.4 Review System Based on Files 2.7 Conclusion 3 Case File Centrism 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Court Investigation Centered on Case Files 3.2.1 The Ways the Prosecutors Lead Court Investigation 3.2.2 Models of Reading Out the Case Files 3.2.3 Court Investigation: Tripartite Game of Asymmetric Information 3.3 Admissibility of Transcripts 3.4 Credibility of Case File 3.5 Space for Criminal Evidence Law 3.6 Ritualization, Theater Effect and Functions of Court Hearing 3.7 Reform of Court Trial System 4 A Study on Criminal Procedure Malfunctions 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Implementation Mechanism of Criminal Procedure Law 4.3 Costs of Legal Proceedings 4.4 Losses Due to Following Procedures 4.5 Two Legal Traditions 4.6 Guarantee of Legal Procedures by Judicial System 4.7 Conclusion 5 Criminal Action in Rem 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Nature of Criminal Action in Rem 5.2.1 Procuratorates Initiate the Action 5.2.2 The Object of Action in Rem is the Claim for Confiscating Illegal Property 5.2.3 Action in Rem Has a Unique Litigation Structure 5.2.4 Application of Mechanism of Proof in Civil Procedure to Action in Rem 5.3 Action in Rem with Defendants Present 5.3.1 Restriction on Judicial Discretion 5.3.2 Maintenance of Procedural Justice 5.3.3 Realization of Trial Centrism. 5.3.4 Restoration of Judicial Credibility 5.4 Two Models of Action in Rem 5.4.1 Independent Action in Rem 5.4.2 Incidental Action in Rem 5.5 Victims’ Participation in Action in Rem 5.6 Litigation Status of Interested Parties 5.7 Procedural Guarantee of Action in Rem 5.8 Conclusion 6 Retrospect and Prospect of Criminal Defense System in the Past Forty Years 6.1 A Brief Review of Development of Criminal Defense System 6.2 Lawyers’ Role: From “State Law Practitioners” to “Legal Agents” 6.3 Lawyers’ Participation: From “Court Defense” to “Whole Process Defense” 6.4 Defense Subjects: From “The Right to Defend” to “The Right to Get Help from Lawyers” 6.5 Defense Effect: From “Obtaining Lawyers’ Help” to “Obtaining Effective Defense” 6.6 Protection of the Right to Defense: “Judicial Remedy” and “Legal Risk Prevention and Control” 6.7 Conclusion Part II Models 7 Negotiated Procedural Justice 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Limitations of Traditional Procedural Justice Theory 7.2.1 Does It Apply to Non-Confrontational Procedures? 7.2.2 Is the Out-Court Procedure Justified? 7.2.3 Are There Objective Standards for the Fairness of Results? 7.2.4 Do the Parties not Care About the Result? 7.3 The Rise of Negotiated Justice and Its Disputes 7.3.1 Sentencing Negotiation Procedure 7.3.2 Criminal Reconciliation Procedure 7.3.3 Disputes Over Negotiated Justice Procedures 7.4 The Theory of Negotiated Procedural Justice 7.4.1 Basic Concepts 7.4.2 Basic Elements 7.5 Foundation of Negotiated Procedural Justice 7.5.1 Litigation Subject Theory 7.5.2 Rational Choice Theory 7.5.3 Utilitarianism Philosophy 7.6 Extended Application of Negotiated Procedural Justice 7.7 Conclusion 8 Confrontation and Cooperation in Judicial Process—A New Theory of Criminal Procedure Model 8.1 Confrontational Justice and Cooperative Justice 8.2 Parkers and Griffith’s Models 8.3 Confrontational Justice and Its Limitations 8.3.1 Basic Principles of Confrontational Justice 8.3.2 Limitations of Confrontational Justice 8.4 Minimum Cooperation Model 8.5 Negotiated Public Cooperation Model 8.5.1 Two Traditions of Negotiated Cooperative Justice 8.5.2 The First Plea Bargaining Case in China 8.5.3 Limits of Negotiated Public Cooperation Model 8.6 Private Cooperation Model 8.6.1 Emergence of Criminal Reconciliation in China 8.6.2 What is Restorative Justice? 8.6.3 China’s Restorative Justice? 8.6.4 Revival of Accusatorial System? 8.7 A New Cooperative Justice Philosophy 8.7.1 Pragmatism Philosophy 8.7.2 Judicial Justice Based on Cooperation 8.7.3 The Third Legal Value 9 Private Cooperation Model in Criminal Procedure 9.1 Emergence of Criminal Reconciliation 9.2 Three Models of Criminal Reconciliation 9.2.1 Defendant-Victim Self-Reconciliation Model 9.2.2 Judicial Mediation Model 9.2.3 People’s Mediation Committee Model 9.3 Practical Interests of Criminal Reconciliation 9.3.1 Common Interests of the Offender and the Victim 9.3.2 The Benefit of Judicial Organs 9.3.3 Social Harmony 9.4 Challenges of Criminal Reconciliation to Traditional Criminal Procedure Theory 9.4.1 Confrontational Model and Cooperative Model 9.4.2 The Model Centered on the Relationship Between the Victim and the Defendant 9.4.3 Boundary Between Criminal Procedure and Civil Procedure 9.5 The Future of Criminal Reconciliation 10 Public Cooperation Model in Criminal Procedure 10.1 Introduction 10.2 Characteristics of Sentencing Negotiation System 10.2.1 Sentencing Negotiation Led by Prosecutors 10.2.2 Negotiating Parties 10.2.3 Sequenced Lenient Sentencing Mechanism 10.2.4 Participation of Duty Lawyers 10.2.5 Judges’ Role 10.3 Foundation of Sentencing Negotiation System 10.3.1 Rational Allocation of Judicial Resources Through Sentencing Incentive Mechanism 10.3.2 A Win–win Situation 10.3.3 Substantive Procedural Justice 10.4 Problems in Sentencing Negotiation System 10.4.1 Abuse of Power by Prosecutors 10.4.2 Negotiation Between Prosecutors and the Suspects? 10.4.3 Limitations of Legal Assistance of Duty Lawyers 10.4.4 Judicial Review 10.5 Conceptual Challenges for the Sentencing Negotiation System 10.5.1 Finding Facts 10.5.2 Justice in Criminal Law 10.5.3 The Idea of Equality Before the Law 10.5.4 Abuse of Discretion 10.5.5 Status of Defendants 10.6 Conclusion 11 Compliance Incentive Models in Criminal Procedure 11.1 Introduction 11.2 Two Models of Compliance-Based Non-prosecution 11.2.1 Procuratorial Suggestion Model 11.2.2 Conditional Non-prosecution Model 11.2.3 Choice of Models of Compliance-Based Non-prosecution 11.3 Reasons for Establishing Compliance-Based Non-prosecution System 11.3.1 Protecting Private Enterprises 11.3.2 Compliance of Private Enterprise Business Model 11.3.3 A New Way for Procuratorates to Participate in Social Governance 11.4 Controversies in the Compliance-Based Non-prosecution System 11.4.1 Procuratorates’ Power to Impose Fines 11.4.2 Compliance Supervision Period 11.4.3 Procedural Interface Between Procuratorates and Public Security Organs 11.4.4 Procedural Interface Between Procuratorates and Administrative Supervisory Authorities 11.4.5 Effectiveness of Independent Supervisor System 11.4.6 Object of Application of Compliance System 11.5 Influence of Compliance-Based Non-prosecution on Criminal Procedure Theory 11.5.1 Effect of Compliance Incentive 11.5.2 A New Crime Prevention Theory 11.5.3 Enterprise Self-regulation Theory 11.6 Conclusion 12 Three Models of Incidental Civil Action 12.1 Challenges of Incidental Civil Action 12.2 “Criminal Action Priority over Civil Action” Model 12.2.1 Theoretical Foundation of “Criminal Action Priority over Civil Action” Model 12.2.2 Challenges of “Criminal Action Priority over Civil Action” Model 12.2.3 Theoretical Reflection on “Criminal Action Priority over Civil Action” Model 12.3 “Separation of Criminal and Civil Actions” Model 12.3.1 Main Reasons for “Separation of Criminal and Civil Actions” Model 12.3.2 Some Reflections 12.4 “Civil Action Priority over Criminal Action” Model 12.4.1 Reasons for “Civil Action Priority over Criminal Action” Model 12.4.2 Legitimacy of “Civil Action Priority over Criminal Action” Model 12.5 Choice of Criminal Incidental Civil Models 13 China’s Model of Exclusionary Rule 13.1 Introduction 13.2 Mandatory Exclusion and Discretionary Exclusion 13.3 Curable Exclusion 13.4 “Procedural Review First” 13.5 Allocation of the Burden of Proof 13.6 Conclusion: Laws Alone Do Not Implement Themselves References Index