Judicial reform is closely related to everybody, be they are involved in a specific case, or the general public. A more scientific judicial system can promote judicial justice, improve judicial efficiency and guarantee that the whole society becomes more stable and harmonious.

In 2005, China will further intensify efforts for judicial reform to bring out frequent flashpoints in this respect.

Judicial reviewing system: Getting out of "marathon lawsuit"

Background: The judicial reviewing system means that the people's court reviews a case according to law when it discovers that the judgment or adjudication already with legal validity is really wrong.

Legal experts point out that the current adjudication supervision procedure has three main defects: The court and the procuratorate can start reviewing according to their functions and powers, while the litigant has difficulty having a case review through making an appeal; the reasons for starting review are wide and vague, the court's free jurisdiction is too large; the unlimited number and time for application for review lead to disorder and low efficiency of lawsuit, thus giving rise to a series of verdicts known as "marathon lawsuits" and "the turning-over of sesame seed cake". These defects have affected the judicial faculty of judgment and public confidence, making it hard to achieve stability of social relations, which will finally shake the foundation for rule of law.

Hu Yunteng, deputy director of the Research Office of the Supreme People's Court, told this reporter Wu Jing that the judicial review system reform under planning will mainly study solution to the defects of the current adjudication supervision system.

Clearly defining the litigant's right to start judicial review.

Under the current system, the judge's jurisdiction over the start of judicial review is too big, as a result, judicial review has become a kind of "treatment", and thus the masses even have to do something through pull and the back door. After reform, as long as a case meets the condition of legal stipulations, the court must conduct review, the litigant who applies for review need not appeal to the higher authority, nor seek connected individual or group for help.

Clearly defining reasons for starting review.

According to the current Civil Procedure Law, there are five reasons for applying for review, the formulation is very concise, which is almost all-inclusive and has the tendency of "stressing substance to the neglect of procedure" and "putting decision before trial".

The National adjudication supervision reform experience-exchange meeting held in August 2002 put forward 13 reasons for starting review. Of which, nine programming reasons include the judicial court's lack of jurisdiction over cases and the omission of litigant that must take part in the lawsuit; the four substantive reasons include the mistakes of applicable laws and regulations which suffice to affect the fairness of judgment. These 13 reasons attach equal importance to procedure and entity, are highly operational, and play a great role of reference in reform of the judicial review system.

Standardizing the review procedure.

As litigation resources are limited and litigation cost is high, litigation rights cannot be limitless. The time and number of review applied for, and the institution of related procedures to the court at a certain level will be clarified.

Hu Yunteng discloses that the people's court's judicial review system is intended for substantive progress to be made this year.

People's jurymen: Having the same right as the judge

Background: The "Decision on Perfecting the People's Juror System" (hereinafter referred to as "Decision") passed by the 10th National People's Congress Standing Committee will be put into practice on May 1 this year.

People's jurymen are born in line with the legal proceedings, they take part in trials according to law and have the same right as judges.

According to the arrangements made by the Supreme People's Court, preliminary election of people's jurymen was carried out in January and February; these personnel will receive concentrated training in March and April; after they are appointed by the standing committees of county people's congresses, they will placed at their respective posts on May 1.

The people's juryman system fully embodies judicial democracy and facilitates people's supervision over judicature.

After May 1, the people's juryman system will become better:

Unified appointment. Jurors are now appointed or recruited by courts in various localities, they are finally appointed in a unified way by the standing committees of various local people��s congresses;

The jury scope is clearly set. What kind of cases needs jury? That has not been clearly stipulated by current laws. Under the "Decision", the jury scope is clearly set as the first trial case that has fairly large social effect, the litigant himself can also apply for letting people's juryman participate in the trial;

Random extraction. At present, generally jurors are rotatingly designated by courts to participate in trials; this is changed to random extraction after May 1.

Judicial committee: In charge of both sentence and trial.

Background: The judicial committee is the highest judicial organization within the court. Its basic duty is to "summarize judicial experiences, discuss major or difficult cases and other problems related to judicial work."

The judge does not make judgment, while the judicial officer does not try cases.

Those are the descriptions made by some legal experts about the current judicial committee system. It is the collegiate bench that tries some cases, but it is the judicial committee that makes the final decision. Under the modern judicial environment, the three major defects of the system have been increasingly brought to light:

First, the organizational form is administrative-oriented. Members of the judicial committee are mainly presidents of law courts or tribunals, while no attention is paid to the recruitment of experienced judges; second, the operational form is of a conference-style. A meeting room is used to replace the tribunal, so it is impossible to give expression to the value of legal proceedings; third, the result of a resolution is made a mystery. The judicial committee does not give its signature and its reasons of judgment, nor does it write out its verdict.

At present, the Supreme People's Court is studying and drafting a concrete plan for reforming the judicial committee. The following three points will possibly become the targeting choice for reform:

The organizational form is of a judicial style. The judicial committee should be made up of high-level, senior professional judges, so that it will become a judicial organization in its real sense;

The work program becomes a legal process. In trying cases, the judicial committee must conduct written trial or open a court session for trial of cases according to law, instead of deciding the result of a case by listening to reports or by holding group meetings;

The result of judgment is made public. The decision made by the judicial committee should make public the personnel who participated in making the decision, and the conclusion and reason of judgment.

Reforming the system of reviewing a case in which a death sentence has been passed and the executive system, perfecting the circuit court system, and popularizing simple and easy procedures. People are in expectation of a judicial reform as they look forward to 2005. Steadily pushing forward judicial reform will provide better legal guarantee for the realization of fairness and justice in the whole society.

Carried on the front page of People's Daily (Overseas Edition) on February 18, 2005, the above article was translated by People's Daily Online