# LongBench v2 / 66f36490821e116aacb2cc22

task_id: 357eb2e2-5e77-5620-9fad-823911d77f95
task_key: train--66f36490821e116aacb2cc22
task_revision_id: 1

{"choice_A":"Through technology empowerment, change the way of working and improve office efficiency.","choice_B":"Establish new types of courts, such as intellectual property courts, financial courts, and Internet courts, and accelerate the construction of intelligent courts.","choice_C":"Improve the work ability of office staff and strengthen the reserve of work knowledge.","choice_D":"Use advanced information systems to improve the level of information technology in case handling.","context":"Contents\nPreface.\n................................................................................................ 67\nI. China’s Court System and Reform Process.\n.................................... 68\nII. Fully Implementing the Judicial Accountability System............... 74\nIII. Advancing the Reform of Organizational Structure of Courts..... 86\nIV. \u0007\nStrengthening the System and Mechanism of  \nJudicial Protection of Human Rights............................................ 93\nV. Promoting people’s access to and benefits from the judiciary..... 105\nVI. \u0007\nSolidly Advance the “Basically Solving the Difficulties in \nEnforcement” Campaign.............................................................119\nVII. Deepening Judicial Openness and Judicial Democracy............ 126\nVIII. \u0007\nPromoting Scientific and Classified Management over  \nJudicial Personnel.................................................................... 136\nIX. \u0007\nImproving the System and Mechanism of  \nJudicial Service and Securing National Development.\n............... 143\nX. \u0007\nImproving the Judicial Management System and the  \nJurisdiction System...................................................................... 148\nXI. Advancing the Construction of Intelligent Courts...................... 155\nConclusion........................................................................................ 160\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   2\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:41:24\n\n\n67\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nPreface\nThe rule by law is the fundamental method for administering the country \nand managing governmental affairs, while justice is a key cornerstone of \nthe system of rule by law. Comprehensively deepening judicial reform \nhas great and profound implications for improving and developing the \nsocialist judicial system with Chinese characteristics and promoting the \nmodernization of governance system and capability in our country. Since \n2013, by always taking the fundamental realities of our country into \nconsideration and keeping pace with the times, and with the aim to make \nthe public experience fairness and justice in each judicial case, the people’s \ncourts have unswervingly and comprehensively deepened judicial reform, \nand improved their adjudication and enforcement in an all-round way, and \ncomprehensively enhanced the efficiency, competency, and public credibility \nof the judiciary, achieving fruitful results.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   67\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n68\n-\n-\nI. China’s Court System and Reform Process\nInstitutional Basis of Court Reform in China\nAccording to the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China and the \nOrganic Law of the People’s Courts of the People’s Republic of China, \nthe people’s courts, as judicial organs of the State, exercise adjudicative \npower in accordance with laws independently, free from any interference \nby administrative organs, social organizations, and individuals. The State \nsets up the Supreme People’s Court, local people’s courts at different levels \nand special people’s courts such as military courts. In accordance with laws, \nthese people’s courts adjudicate civil, criminal and administrative cases and \nother cases prescribed by laws, and carry out judicial activities including the \nexecution of civil and administrative decisions. Sole judges, collegial panels, \njudicial committees, and compensation committees are the judicial organs \nprescribed by laws.\nThe Supreme People’s Court, as the highest judicial organ of the People’s \nRepublic of China, is responsible for adjudicating various cases that have \nmaterial effects nationwide or are subject to its adjudication according to \nlaw, formulating judicial interpretations, supervising and guiding the judicial \nwork of local people’s courts at different levels and special people’s courts, \nand managing certain judicial administration work of the courts nationwide \nwithin the scope of its functions and powers as per laws.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   68\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n69\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nLocal people’s courts at different levels include primary people’s courts, \nintermediate people’s courts and higher people’s courts. Special people’s \ncourts include military courts, maritime courts, IP courts, financial courts, \netc.\nA people’s court at a higher level supervises the judicial work of the people’s \ncourts at the next lower level. In litigious activities, the people’s courts adopt \nthe systems of public trial, collegiate panel, challenge, people’s assessors, \ndefense, and judgment of the second instance as final, etc.\nBasic Process of Court Reform in China\nSince the introduction of the reform and opening-up policy, along with \nall-round economic and social development, continuous advancement of \ndemocracy and rule by law, and the public’s ever-increasing demands for \nand expectations of judicature, the original judicial system has become \nunable to meet the need of new situations. As early as in the 1990s, China’s \ncourts started the reforms focusing on enhancing the function of court trials, \nexpanding the openness of trials and improving judicial professionalization. \nSince the 15th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (“CPC”), \nthe Supreme People’s Court has initiated a series of reforms in the areas \nof organization and system of courts, judge system, litigation procedure, \nmethod of trial, enforcement system, judicial management, etc., and \npromulgated three “Five-year Reform Program for People’s Courts” in 1999, \n2005 and 2009 respectively. The said three Programs served as the basis of \nChina’s court reform before 2013.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   69\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n70\n-\n-\nThe Decision of the Central Committee of the CPC (“CCCPC”) on Some \nMajor Issues Concerning Comprehensively Deepening the Reform adopted \nat the 3rd Plenary Session of the 18th CCCPC set an important task of \nadvancing rule by law in China and deepening the reform of the judicial \nsystem. The Decision of the CCCPC on Some Major Issues Concerning \nManagement of State Affairs under the Rule of Law in an All-round Way \nadopted at the 4th Plenary Session of the 18th CCCPC set the establishment \nof a socialist system of rule by law with Chinese characteristics and the \nbuilding of a socialist country under the rule of law as the general objective \nof advancing management of state affairs under the rule of law in an all-\nround way, and put forward a series of major reform measures in scientific \nlegislation, strict law enforcement, judicial impartiality, universal law \nabiding and other areas. The judicial reform has become an important \ncomponent of the program of comprehensively deepening the reform in \nChina and has been included in the overall development strategy of the \nState.\nIn order to further deepening the reform of people’s courts, the Supreme \nPeople’s Court promulgated the Opinions on Comprehensively Deepening \nthe Reform of People’s Courts on February 4, 2015, putting forward 65 \nreform measures, which was served as the Fourth Five-year Reform \nProgram for People’s Courts 2014-2018. As of the end of 2018, 65 reform \ntasks had been carried out in an all-round way, 256 reform documents had \nbeen formulated. Among these reform documents, 173 were issued by the \nSupreme People’s Court separately, 46 were issued by it jointly with the \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   70\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n71\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nrelated departments of the Central Government, and 37 were formulated \nwith its promotion or participation.\nAt the 19th National Congress of the CPC, major strategic arrangement was \nmade as follows: “deepening the comprehensive and supporting reform of \nthe judicial system and fully implementing the judicial accountability system \nso that people can experience fairness and justice in each case”, which \nmarks a new stage of the judicial system reform. Based on the realities of \ncourts, the Supreme People’s Court formulated the Opinions on Deepening \nthe Comprehensive and Supporting Reform of the Judicial System in the \nPeople’s Courts, namely the Fifth Five-Year Reform Program for People’s \nCourts 2019-2023 as an important program for instructing the people’s \ncourts to deepen the comprehensive and supporting reform of the judicial \nsystem in the next five years.\nOrganization and Implementation of the Court Reform in China\nIn early 2014, China set up the Central Leading Group for Comprehensively \nDeepening Reform headed by President Xi Jinping, which is responsible \nfor the overall design, arrangement, coordination, promotion and \nimplementation of the reform. In March 2018, it was renamed as the \nCentral Comprehensively Deepening Reforms Commission. Between \nJanuary 22, 2014 and December 31, 2018, the Central Leading Group for \nComprehensively Deepening Reform (hereinafter referred to as “CLGCDR”) \nand the Central Comprehensively Deepening Reforms Commission \n(hereinafter referred to as “CCDRC”), in aggregate, held 45 meetings, \nconsidered and passed 35 documents relating to important reforms of \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   71\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n72\n-\n-\npeople’s courts.\nThe CCDRC has six special sub-groups, which are responsible for \nconsidering important issues relating to reforms in the relevant areas, \ncoordinating and advancing the formulation and implementation of special \nreform policies and measures. The Leading Group for Reform of the Social \nSystem (also called Central Leading Group for Reform of the Judicial \nSystem) is responsible for deepening the reform of the judicial system.\nThe reform of the judicial system covers a wide range of issues and has \nhigh policy sensitivity. In consideration that the improvement of classified \nmanagement of judicial personnel, improvement of judicial accountability, \nimprovement of job security of judicial personnel and promotion of \ncentralized management of personnel, financial and material resources of \nlocal courts below the provincial level are basic measures of the reform \nof the judicial system, according to the principle that major reforms shall \nbe first conducted on a pilot basis, China launched pilot reforms in respect \nof the aforesaid four issues in some provinces, autonomous regions and \nmunicipalities directly under the Central Government in three batches, to \naccumulate experience for advancing the reform in an all-round way. Since \nJune 2014, the first judicial system reform pilots have been initiated in 7 \nprovinces and municipalities directly under the Central Government, namely \nShanghai, Jilin, Hubei, Guangdong, Hainan, Guizhou, and Qinghai. Since \nJune 2015, the second judicial system reform pilots have been initiated in \n11 provinces, autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the Central \nGovernment, namely Shanxi, Inner Mongolia, Heilongjiang, Jiangsu, \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   72\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n73\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nZhejiang, Anhui, Fujian, Shandong, Chongqing, Yunnan, and Ningxia. Since \nMarch 2016, the third judicial system reform pilots have been initiated in \nBeijing and other 13 provinces, autonomous regions, municipalities directly \nunder the Central Government and the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region \nProduction and Construction Corps. Since July 2016, these four major \nreforms have been implemented nationwide in an all-round way. \nThe Supreme People’s Court set up a leading group for judicial reform \nheaded by Chief Judge Zhou Qiang, responsible for organizing, leading, \narranging, and coordinating the judicial reform of courts, holding plenary \nand special meetings, overall planning of key issues of reform, considering \nreform proposals, discussing and deciding on major issues. Each higher \npeople’s court sets up a leading group for judicial reform, responsible for \nsupervising, guiding, arranging, and coordinating the judicial reform of \ncourts within its jurisdiction. Each higher people’s court’s proposal of pilot \nprogram for judicial reform is subject to examination and approval by the \nSupreme People’s Court, and if it involves any major reform, by the Central \nGovernment.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   73\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n74\n-\n-\nII. Fully Implementing the Judicial Accountability System\nIt is both an objective requirement of the law of justice and a core content \nof the reform of the judicial system that one who tries a case shall have the \npower to decide the case and be responsible for his decision. In September \n2015, the Supreme People’s Court issued certain opinions on improving \nthe judicial accountability system in the people’s courts, establishing a \nnew type of operating mechanism of adjudicative power, to instruct the \ncourts nationwide to advance the reform of the judicial accountability \nsystem. In December 2018, the Supreme People’s Court issued opinions on \nfurther comprehensively implementing the judicial accountability system, \nproviding more guidance on issues such as improving the mechanism of \ntrial supervision and management and the mechanism of unified application \nof law, to promote full implementation of the judicial accountability \nsystem. Since the full implementation of the judicial accountability system \nreform, in courts nationwide, the number of first-line judicial personnel has \nincreased over 20%, the average number of cases handled by each person \nhas increased over 20%, and the rate of conclusion of cases has increased \nover 18%.\nImplementing accountability system for sole judges and collegiate \npanels handling cases. Fully respecting the status of sole judges and \ncollegiate panels as statutory judicial organs, most of the courts at all levels \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   74\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n75\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nhave established an accountability system in which “one who tries a case \nshall have the power to decide the case and be responsible for his decision”, \nand have revoked the system of asking for instructions and examination and \napproval level by level. The written judgments formed through adjudication \nby collegiate panels or sole judges are issued upon signature by collegiate \npanel members or sole judges. Except the cases considered and decided \nby the judicial committees, court/tribunal presidents no longer review or \nsign the written judgments on the cases of which they have not directly \nparticipated in the trial. Since the reform, in courts nationwide, the number \nof cases on which the judgments are directly made by sole judges and \ncollegiate panels has reached over 98% of the total number of cases, and \nthe number of cases referred to judicial committees for discussion has fallen \nsharply. In Shanghai, since the launch of the reform, the ratio of the cases \ndirectly decided by the sole judges or collegiate panels has reached 99.99%, \nand only 0.1% of the cases concluded have been submitted to the judicial \ncommittees for discussion.\nFlexibly organizing the judicial team. According to laws and based \non actual circumstances, the primary people’s courts organize judicial \nteams with judge as the core member, and judge assistant, clerk and other \nauxiliary judicial personnel as the supporting members, describe the duties \nof judges, judge assistants and clerks, and improve the case handling \nmechanism with clear power and responsibility, consistency between power \nand responsibility, both division and cooperation, and orderly operation, \nby taking into overall consideration the separation of complicated cases \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   75\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n76\n-\n-\nfrom simple ones and the specialization of adjudication. By following the \nidea of separating complicated cases from simple ones, Chaoyang District \nPeople’s Court in Beijing has organized 26 quick-track sentencing teams \nfor simple cases, each of which concludes over 650 cases annually, and \n45 specialized judicial teams for finance, intellectual property rights, real \nestate, bankruptcy and other meticulous trial of complicated cases, which \nhave fairly tried a large number of major doubtful and complicated cases. \nFutian District People’s Court in Shenzhen, Guangdong, has created a new \nmode of organizing judicial team as follows: in a quick-track sentencing, \nquick trial and quick enforcement team, each judge is supported by multiple \nassistants; in an ordinary judicial team, there are 3 relatively fixed basic \ncase-handling units, each of which consists of 1 judge and 2 assistants, so \nthat the judicial team is both stable and flexible and the judicial resources \nallocation is optimized. In 2018, all kinds of judicial teams in this court \nconcluded 107,301 cases, with a YoY increase of 16.32%, and the quality \nand efficiency of trial continuously improved.\nReforming the case allocation mechanism. The courts at all levels have \nestablished a case allocation mechanism where random allocation plays a \nmajor role and assignment a supporting role. Cases are randomly allocated \nto judges based on the area and complexity of cases. If the judge handling \na case needs to be replaced due to challenge or due to job transfer, health, \nrisk of corruption, etc., the replacement is subject to review and approval \nby relevant court/tribunal president, and the replacement result shall be \nnotified to the litigants in a timely manner and made public on the working \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   76\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:01\n\n\n77\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nplatform. The courts in Shanghai have formulated guidelines on random and \nautomated allocation of cases and has realized random allocation of civil \nand commercial cases. The Suburb People’s Court in Sanya, Hainan has \nintroduced an automated case allocation system, whereby, after scientifically \npresetting saturated workload of judges, cases are randomly allocated \nupon automated calculation of workload based on case-handling quota \nand unconcluded cases of judges, to address the problem of unbalanced \nallocation of cases through informatization.\nInnovating the auxiliary trial work mode. The courts at all levels \nhave organized work teams specializing in service of process, property \npreservation, enforcement examination and control, document uploading, \nonline announcement and other affairs. They manage auxiliary trial affairs \nin a centralized way to improve work efficiency. The courts in Beijing, \nShanghai, Jiangsu, Fujian, Guangdong, etc. actively explore ways of \nhandling notice service, material scanning, file filing and other auxiliary \naffairs by purchasing social services, to improve the efficiency of handling \ncases with the aid of external service providers. Shenzhen Intermediate \nPeople’s Court in Guangdong has formulated guidelines on courts’ purchase \nof social services, setting out the scope, procedures, and standards for courts \nto purchase social services, and listing seven categories of 41 services which \nmay be outsourced in litigation service, adjudication and enforcement, \ncourt management, logistics support, judicial transparency, informatization, \nculture construction, and other areas. In 2018, by outsourcing mediation \nassistance service, it successfully mediated 15,829 disputes before litigation; \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   77\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n78\n-\n-\nby using social services, it scanned hard-copy materials and generated soft-\ncopy ones of over 200,000 cases, constantly improving the efficiency of \nhandling cases. Siming District People’s Court and Lujiang Notary Public \nOffice in Xiamen, Fujian has created the first litigation-notary collaborative \ninnovation center in China, clarifying that notary offices may assist people’s \ncourts with procedural and auxiliary judicial services.\nImproving the mechanism for regular handling of cases by court/\ntribunal presidents. The courts nationwide have implemented the judge \nquota system. According to the requirements that registered judges must \nhandle cases, the presidents (including vice presidents) of courts/tribunals \nat all levels generally engage again in trial work upon registration as judge. \nIn April 2017, the Supreme People’s Court issued guidelines on further \npromoting the presidents of courts/tribunals at all levels registered as judges \nto handle cases, establishing a mechanism for strict constraint, evaluation \nand supervision on case-handling by court/tribunal presidents and improving \nthe mechanism for court officials mainly to adjudicate major doubtful and \ncomplicated cases, to give full play to the exemplary and leading role of \ncourt/tribunal presidents in handling cases. In 2018, in Jiangsu, the number \nof cases adjudicated by court/tribunal presidents as handling judge or chief \njudge accounted for 50.84% of the total number of cases before the courts \nacross the province. \nImproving the new trial management and supervision mechanism. In \nApril 2017, the Supreme People’s Court issued opinions on implementation \nof the judicial accountability system and improvement of the trial \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   78\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n79\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nsupervision and management mechanism to instruct the courts at all levels \nto improve the new supervision and management system. The courts at all \nlevels have formulated a list of powers and responsibilities of court/tribunal \npresidents and related regulations to set out the scope and method for court/\ntribunal presidents to exercise their power to supervise and manage trials, \nand to actively build a supervision and management mechanism covering \nthe entire court, all staff, and whole process through informatization. The \ncourt/tribunal presidents may only express their opinions on specific cases \npublicly through professional judge meetings and the judicial committee, \nand such opinions shall be wholly recorded on the working platform, so that \npowers are delegated without indulgence and exercised under supervision. \nThe courts in Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shanghai, Sichuan and other regions, by \nrelying on artificial intelligence and big data, explore how to achieve online \nsupervision through automated recognition, labeling, system recommending, \nnode control, authority freezing and other means. Tianjin Higher People’s \nCourt issued 29 categories of judicial standards in four batches covering \nadjudication process, power exercise, judicial transparency, litigation service \nand other areas. Chengdu Intermediate People’s Court in Sichuan, by closely \ncentering on five major links of case filing, adjudication, conclusion, appeal, \nand enforcement, and relying on online working platform, has achieved \nsilent supervision on 183 work nodes and 68 monitoring nodes, in order to \nassist judges in handling cases.\nImproving the chief judge meeting system. Most of the courts at all levels \nhave established the chief judge meeting system to provide judges with \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   79\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n80\n-\n-\nadvice on correct application of law and provide opinions for reference by \ncollegiate panels. In December 2018, the Supreme People’s Court issued \nguidelines on improving the working mechanism of chief judge meetings \nin people’s courts to improve the rules of procedure of professional judge \nmeetings. Chongqing No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court has established \nthe systems of joint meeting of judges in the tribunals and the cross-\ndepartmental meeting of judges, with the number of cases submitted to \nthe judicial committee for discussion being reduced by 42% year on year, \nthereby giving full play to the service and consultation functions of the \nmeetings of judges and the function of filtration of the cases submitted to the \njudicial committee for discussion.\nReforming the system of judicial committee. The Supreme People’s \nCourt has formulated guidelines to strengthen the function of the judicial \ncommittees in summarizing experience in adjudication, unifying the \napplication of law and discussing and deciding on major issues in respect of \nadjudication. Except as otherwise provided by laws, the decisions made by \njudicial committees on cases and the grounds therefor shall be made public \nin the written judgments. The people’s courts above intermediate level \nshall hold criminal trials, civil-administrative trials and other professional \ncommittee meetings, based on professional background of and division of \nwork among judicial committee members, as needed by adjudication. In \naddition to the cases required by the law and the major and complicated \ncases involving foreign affairs, security and social stability of the State, the \njudicial committees shall focus on the application of law in major, difficult \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   80\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n81\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nand complicated cases. Since the launch of the reform, the number of cases \nsubmitted to the judicial committees in the people’s courts at all levels for \ndiscussion has decreased significantly. In the Higher People’s Court of the \nInner Mongolia Autonomous Region, since the launch of the reform of \njudicial committee system, the number of judicial committee meetings held \nhas reduced by 14.3% year on year, and the number of cases discussed has \nreduced by 45.1% year on year, and the function of the judicial committees \nhas become more focused on summarizing experience in adjudication \nand discussing and deciding on major issues in respect of adjudication. In \nall courts in Hainan, since the launch of the reform of judicial committee \nsystem, the number of cases discussed by judicial committee has reduced by \n41.75% year on year.\nEstablishing the system of guiding cases, the system of similar case \nsearch report, and the like. The Supreme People’s Court has established \nthe system of guiding cases and formulated the detailed implementing rules \nfor guiding cases. As of the end of 2018, a total of 106 guiding cases has \nbeen published in 20 batches. The cases tried by the courts at all levels that \nare similar to any guiding cases published by the Supreme People’s Court \nin terms of basic circumstances of the cases and applicable laws shall be \nadjudicated by reference to the main reasons for the adjudication of such \nguiding cases and refer to such guiding cases in the statement of reasons \nfor judgments. Most regions have established the system of reference cases, \nthe system of guiding cases, and the like. Hainan Higher People’s Court \nhas established a database of reference cases, so as to effectively reduce \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   81\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n82\n-\n-\nthe phenomenon of “different judgments on similar cases”. The courts in \nHunan requires handling judges to prepare related cases search reports in \nconnection with the cases in dispute over law application or possibility of \n“different judgments on similar cases”.\nImproving the accountability system for illegal adjudication. The \nSupreme People’s Court has issued the relevant regulations, expressly \nproviding that a judge shall be responsible for his/her performance of duties \nof adjudication, and for the quality of cases handled by him/her for life, and \nthat a judge shall be held liable for illegal adjudication if he/she intentionally \nviolates the laws in adjudication or commits any gross negligence resulting \nin any wrong judgment and causing any serious consequences; specifying \nthe circumstances and conditions for exemption from responsibility for \nadjudication; on the principle that one who has powers shall assume \ncorresponding responsibilities and one who is derelict in his duty shall be \nheld liable, specifying the responsibility for supervision and management \nthat a court/tribunal presidents shall assume if he/she improperly exercises \nany power of supervision and management over trials due to intentional \nor gross negligence; and improving the procedures for the determination, \ninvestigation, review and affixation of responsibility in respect of misjudged \ncases to strictly hold judges liable for illegal adjudication.\nEstablishing the system for punishing judges. In October 2016, the \nSupreme People’s Court issued the opinions on the establishment of a \nsystem for punishing judges, which require the establishment of a system \nfor punishing judges under which the people’s courts and judge punishment \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   82\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n83\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\ncommittees assume their respective responsibilities. 27 provinces \n(autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the Central Government) \nhave established judge punishment committees at the provincial level \ncomprising judge representatives from courts at the three levels and \ncivilians, which shall be responsible for reviewing whether any judge has \nbreached the responsibility for adjudication or committed any intentional \nor gross negligence or should assume the liability for illegal adjudication, \nand proposing punishments to be meted out, thus realizing both goals of \nimposing punishments in a timely manner according to law and ensuring job \nsecurity.\nImproving the judge performance evaluation system. The Supreme \nPeople’s Court has issued guidelines on improving the judge performance \nevaluation system and the performance-based bonus distribution mechanism, \nrequiring that performance-based bonus may not be linked to judge’s \nrank and shall be distributed mainly based on the level of responsibility, \nthe quality, number, and difficulty of cases handled, and other factors \nand in favor of first-line case handling personnel. The courts at all levels \nshall formulate a judge performance evaluation system that is simple and \neasy to implement, by always combining objective quantification and \nsubjective evaluation with a focus on quantitative evaluation, taking into full \nconsideration of the differences between regions, trial levels, specialties and \ndepartments, in light of their respective local conditions.\nEstablishing the system of recording and circulating notices of criticism \non the interference by officials and insiders of judicial organs with \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   83\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n84\n-\n-\njudicial activities and handling of specific case and holding them \naccountable. The General Affairs Offices of the CCCPC and the State \nCouncil have jointly issued the regulations on recording, circulating notices \nof criticism on and investigating officials’ interference with judicial activities \nand handling of specific cases and holding them accountable. The Supreme \nPeople’s Court has formulated the measures for implementing the system \nof recording the interference by officials and insiders of judicial organs \nrespectively with judicial activities and handling of specific case and holding \nthem accountable. The courts at all levels shall each establish a special \ndatabase of interference with cases by outsiders and insiders in their case \ninformation management systems. The staff members of people’s courts shall \nrecord in a complete, truthful and timely manner all the correspondences, \nletters and oral opinions relating to any specific cases passed on by various \npeople outside the legal proceedings. Each people’s court shall summarize \nand analyze the information in its database of interference with cases by \noutsiders involving interference by officials on a quarterly basis, prepare a \nspecial report thereon and submit the same to the departments concerned \nand the people’s court at the higher level. Any staff member of a people’s \ncourt who fails to record such information or to record such information \ntruthfully or any official in charge who incites any staff member not to \nrecord such information or not to record such information truthfully shall be \nsubject to disciplinary actions depending on the actual circumstances. Since \nthe establishment of the system, the interference with judicial activities and \nhandling of specific case has been significantly reduced, providing stronger \ninstitutional protection for the independent and fair exercise of adjudicative \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   84\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n85\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\npower by people’s courts by law.\nImproving the mechanism for protecting judicial personnel in \nperforming their duties by law. In February 2017, the Supreme People’s \nCourt issued implementation measures for protecting judges in performing \ntheir statutory duties by operation of law, which expressly provide that no \nadministrative organ, social organization or individual may interfere with \nthe adjudication of cases by judges as per law; no entity or individual may \nrequest any judge to do anything beyond the scope of his/her statutory \nduties; except for legal causes or according to legal procedures, no judge \nmay be transferred to a different post, removed from office, dismissed, \ndemoted or discharged or subject to any other punishment; any person \nwho interferes with or obstructs any judicial activity, threatens, disturbs, \ntakes revenge on, frames up, insults, defames or commits violence towards \nany judicial person or any close relative thereof shall be subject to serious \npunishment immediately according to law; and any person who insults or \ndefames any judge by submitting any false report, lodging false accusations \nor fabricating false charges through the information network or otherwise \nshall be held legally liable under the law, so as to create a favorable \ninstitutional environment for judges to perform their duties.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   85\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n86\n-\n-\nIII. Advancing the Reform of Organizational Structure of \nCourts\nImproving an optimized, coordinated and efficient organizational system \nand functional system of courts is an important part and goal of the \njudicial reform of the people’s courts, and an important support for the \nmodernization of judicial system and judicial capability. Since 2013, China’s \ncourts have actively promoted the reform of organizational system and \ninternal organs of courts, optimized the jurisdiction and power allocation, \nand promoted the combination of specialized trials and flat management, \nlaying a solid foundation for serving the big picture, exercising judicial \npower for the people, and judicial impartiality.\nSetting up Circuit Courts of the Supreme People’s Court. At the end \nof January 2015, the Supreme People’s Court set up No. 1 and 2 Circuit \nCourts in Shenzhen and Shenyang respectively; at the end of December \n2016, it set up No. 3, 4, 5 and 6 Circuit Courts in Nanjing, Zhengzhou, \nChongqing and Xi’an respectively. These Circuit Courts of the Supreme \nPeople’s Court, as standing local judicial organs dispatched by the Supreme \nPeople’s Court, adjudicate the cases assigned by the Supreme People’s \nCourt according to law. The judgments and rulings made by these Circuit \nCourts have the equal effect as those made by the Supreme People’s Court. \nSince their establishment and as of the end of 2018, the six Circuit Courts \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   86\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n87\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nhave concluded 33,335 cases, accounting for 50.35% of the total number \nof cases concluded by the Supreme People’s Court, and have received a \ntotal of 117,090 visitors who brought complaints and appeals before them \nand resolved relevant disputes before litigation. By vigorously carrying out \nthe circuit adjudication and actively innovating working mechanism, these \nCircuit Courts have effectively realized the original intention to delegate the \nadjudicative power, facilitate initiation of lawsuits by the people, improved \nwork efficiency, effectively promoted social harmony and stability, and \nserved and protected the rule of law in respective circuits, thus being \nnicknamed by the people as the “supreme people’s court at the doorstep”, \nplaying an important role in improving the socialist judicial system with \nChinese characteristics and promoting the rule of law in a comprehensive \nmanner.\nEnhancing the construction of a specialized IP judicial system. In order \nto further enhance judicial protection of intellectual property rights (IP) \nand unifying the adjudicative criteria for IP cases, with the approval by \nthe Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, IP courts were \nestablished in Beijing, Guangzhou and Shanghai on November 6, December \n16 and December 28, 2014 respectively. The Supreme People’s Court has \nissued the relevant judicial interpretations, defining the jurisdiction of IP \ncourts over cases, and providing guidelines on the appointment of IP judges, \nparticipation in litigious activities by technological investigation officers of \nIP courts and other issues. The IP courts have built a new image of China \nin judicial protection of IP through fair adjudication of typical cases, timely \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   87\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n88\n-\n-\npublication of typical cases and otherwise. As of the end of 2018, these \nthree IP courts had accepted a total of 90,578 cases and concluded 74,007 \ncases. In addition, the Supreme People’s Court has also promoted the \nestablishment of 19 IP courts in 16 provinces and cities such as Jiangsu, in \norder to realize centralized jurisdiction over some IP cases across regions. \nOn January 1, 2019, the IP Tribunal of the Supreme People’s Court, which \nwas established according to the decision of the Standing Committee of the \nNational People’s Congress, was officially opened, for unified adjudication \nof highly professional and technical civil and administrative appeals such \nas those involving patent, to form a national mechanism for adjudicating IP \nappeals. The above-mentioned reform measures have effectively promoted \nthe specialized adjudication of, centralized jurisdiction over, and intensified \nprocedures for IP cases, and improved the IP judicial system with Chinese \ncharacteristics.\nLaunching pilot reform of trans-regional courts in Beijing and \nShanghai. In order to ensure lawful and fair adjudication of trans-regional \ncases, the Beijing No. 4 Intermediate People’s Court and the Shanghai No. \n3 Intermediate People’s Court were established in Beijing and Shanghai \nrespectively in December 2014, as pilot trans-regional people’s courts, \nthrough which experience has been accumulated in exploring how to establish \na new pattern of litigation system in which general cases are adjudicated \nat local courts and special cases are adjudicated at trans-regional courts. \nThese two courts are responsible for adjudicating major civil, commercial, \nadministrative, environmental and resource protection, food and drug safety \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   88\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n89\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nand certain criminal cases involving different administrative regions, to \nensure fair adjudication of cases involving local interests. From 2015 to \n2018, the number of first-instance administrative cases brought against a \ndistrict/county government and subject to the centralized jurisdiction of \nand accepted by the Beijing No. 4 Intermediate People’s Court increased \nby 650%. As appointed by the Supreme People’s Court, from October 26, \n2017, this court began to accept the appeals of environmental-protection \nadministrative cases adjudicated by relevant courts in Tianjin, marking \nan important step in cross-provincial jurisdiction of cases. The number of \nadministrative cases accepted by the Shanghai No. 3 Intermediate People’s \nCourt increases by over 30% per year. In 2018, the number of settled and \ndropped administrative cases before this court increased by 126.67% over \nthe previous year. These two trans-regional courts have fairly adjudicated a \nseries of cases with major social impacts, effectively addressing the issue of \n“at home v. away in litigation” and enhancing the public credibility of the \njudiciary.\nSetting up Shanghai Financial Court. According to the decision of the \nStanding Committee of the National People’s Congress, on August 20, \n2018, Shanghai Financial Court was formally established with special \njurisdiction over finance-related civil-commercial cases and finance-related \nadministrative cases subject to the jurisdiction of an Intermediate People’s \nCourt. The Supreme People’s Court has issued judicial interpretations, \nclarifying the specific jurisdiction of the Shanghai Financial Court. As of \nthe end of 2018, Shanghai Financial Court had accepted 1,897 cases, with a \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   89\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n90\n-\n-\ntotal subject value of RMB 25.2 billion, mainly involving disputes related \nto liability for misrepresentation as to securities, financial loan contracts, \ncorporate bond trading, repurchase of pledged securities, financial leasing \ncontracts, for-profit trust, etc.\nSetting up Internet courts in Hangzhou, Beijing and Guangzhou. \nInternet court is a major institutional innovation whereby China’s courts \nactively address the judicial needs in the Internet era and implement the \nInternet power strategy. On August 18, 2017, September 9, 2018, and \nSeptember 28, 2018, Hangzhou Internet Court, Beijing Internet Court, and \nGuangzhou Internet Court were successively established. In September \n2018, the Supreme People’s Court issued judicial interpretations of trials \nbefore Internet courts, clarifying the jurisdiction, appeal mechanism, online \nlitigation rules, and requirements for construction of litigation platform \nof Internet Courts. Internet Courts have actively promoted the “online \nresolution of online disputes” and facilitated the online verification of \nlitigant’s identity, online collection of evidentiary materials, online service \nof legal instruments, etc., thus significantly improving judicial efficiency. \nIn Hangzhou Internet Court, the online case-filing rate has reached 89.2%, \nthe online court-session rate has reached 59.9%, the online case-concluding \nrate has reached 83.6%, the online trial session has averaged 28 minutes, \nand the trial period has averaged 41 days, saving 60% and 50% of the time \nrespectively compared with the traditional trial mode. With an emphasis on \nsummarizing and refining the rules for adjudicating Internet-related cases, \nthe Internet Courts have successfully and efficiently adjudicated a number of \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   90\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n91\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\ndifficult and complicated Internet-related cases of new types, including the \nownership of big data, the liability for contracting fault in online shopping, \nand the ownership of copyright in AI works, thus strongly promoting the \nrule of law in cyberspace governance.\nReforming the organizational system of military courts. Military courts \nare judicial organs set up by the State in the army. According to the overall \narrangement by the Central Government, the basis for the setup of military \ncourts was changed from branches of services and systems into combat \nzones. After the said reform, the new organizational system of military \ncourts includes the PLA Military Court (at the level of higher court), the \nMilitary Court of the East Combat Zone of the PLA, the Military Court of \nthe South Combat Zone of the PLA, the No. 1 and No. 2 Military Courts \nof the West Combat Zone of the PLA, the Military Court of the Northern \nCombat Zone of the PLA, the Military Court of the Central Combat Zone \nof the PLA and the Military Court Directly under the Headquarters of the \nPLA (at the level of intermediate court), and 26 military courts of the PLA \nin Shanghai, Nanjing, and Hangzhou and other cities (at the level of primary \ncourt).\nPromoting the reform of internal organs of people’s courts below the \nprovincial level. The Supreme People’s Court, in conjunction with the \nrelated departments of the Central Government, has actively promoted the \nreform of internal organs of people’s courts below the provincial level. In \nline with the principle of synergy, optimization and efficiency, the structure \nof people’s courts shall be streamlined, the number of internal organs shall \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   91\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n92\n-\n-\nbe strictly controlled, the adjudicating departments shall be scientifically \nset up, and non-adjudicating departments with overlapping functions and \nsimilar services shall be integrated, in order to promote flat management. \nAs of the end of 2018, Tianjin and Shanghai had completed the task of \nreforming internal organs. The number of internal organs of the intermediate \nand primary people’s courts in Tianjin has been reduced from 361 before the \nreform to 234, a reduction of 35.2%; the number of internal organs (excluding \npeople’s tribunals) of 17 primary courts in Shanghai has been reduced from \n298 to 197, a reduction of 33.9%. For the reform of internal organs of the \nprimary courts in other provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities \ndirectly under the Central Government), relevant plan is going through \nreviewing, approving and filing procedure.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   92\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n93\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nIV. Strengthening the System and Mechanism of Judicial \nProtection of Human Rights\nTo respect and protect human rights is an important principle set forth in the \nConstitution of the People’s Republic of China, and an important content \nof the socialist judicial system with Chinese characteristics. China’s courts \nhave achieved positive results in the development of the mechanism of \njudicial protection of human rights through pushing forward the reform of \nthe criminal litigation system centering on trials, strictly implementing the \nlegal principles that crimes shall be punished only under the law, judgments \nshall be made upon evidence and presuming innocent until proven guilty, \nactively preventing cases in which people are unjustly, falsely or wrongly \ncharged or sentenced, protecting the lawyers’ right to practice according \nto law, achieving positive results in building the mechanism of judicial \nprotection of human rights.\nPushing forward the reform of the criminal litigation system centering \non trials. The Supreme People’s Court, in conjunction with the Supreme \nPeople’s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of \nState Security and the Ministry of Justice, issued the guidelines on pushing \nforward the reform of the criminal litigation system centering on trials and \nthe documents on strictly excluding illegal evidence in handling of criminal \ncases. The reform of the criminal litigation system centering on trials \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   93\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n94\n-\n-\nemphasizes making judgments upon evidence, excluding illegal evidence, \npresuming innocent until proven guilty, and other principles, and requires \nstrengthening the substantiation of court trials, improving the mechanism for \nsupervising investigation and prosecution activities through trials, preventing \nextortion of confessions by torture, collection of evidence through illegal \nmeans and other illegal acts from the source, and promoting the formation of \na criminal litigation pattern with litigation centering on trial, trial centering \non court trial, and court trial centering on evidence, so that the facts of cases \nfound during investigations, prosecutions and trials will be proved to be \ntrue according to law. The Supreme People’s Court implemented on a pilot \nbasis the following provisions in 18 intermediate people’s courts across the \ncountry in June 2017 and required the tentative implementation of them \nin all courts nationwide on and from January 1, 2018: holding pre-trial \nmeetings, excluding illegal evidence, and conducting court investigation \naccording to ordinary procedures in the first instance in handling criminal \ncases. All regions have fully implemented the principle of making \njudgments upon evidence, solidly promoted the substantiation of court \ntrials, and improved the system for summoning key witnesses, , appraisers \nand investigators to testify before courts, so as to give full play to the role \nof witnesses’, investigators’, and appraisers’ testifying before courts and \neffectively resolve the disputes between the prosecutors and the defenders. \nIn 2017, the courts in Guangdong accepted 1,582 applications for excluding \nillegal evidence, initiated the process of excluding illegal evidence for 1,424 \ntimes, and excluded 235 pieces of illegal evidence, more than the sum of \nthe previous three years. Chengdu Intermediate People’s Court in Sichuan \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   94\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n95\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\ntook the lead in carrying out the reform of substantiation of court trials in \nthe country, by fully implementing the provisions regarding holding pre-trial \nmeetings, strictly excluding illegal evidence, summoning key witnesses to \ntestify before court, admitting evidence at the court, announcing judgment \nat the court, trying all cases with lawyer’s defense, separating complicated \nwritten judgments with simple ones, opening exemplary court trials, etc., \nso as to ensure that court trials play a decisive role in finding the facts, \nadmitting evidences, protecting the right of action and making judgments \nfairly. In these exemplary court trials, a total of 1,469 witnesses, including \n818 general witnesses, 114 appraisers, 455 investigators, 17 experts, and \n65 victims, testified before courts. Wenzhou Intermediate People’s Court in \nZhejiang has improved the mechanism for protecting personnel testifying \nbefore court, issued detailed rules on investigators’ appearance in court \nas witnesses, provided remote rooms for offering testimonies, devices for \nconcealing faces of witnesses and other appropriate facilities, established the \nmechanism for protecting the rights and interests of witnesses in conjunction \nwith the public security and procuratorial organs, and formulated the \nstandard of subsidies for witnesses testifying before court. Since 2015, the \ncourts in the city have given notices to require 1,434 people in 915 criminal \ncases to appear in courts, and 915 people in 581 criminal cases have actually \nappeared in courts to testify, with the rate of testimony before courts being \n63.8%.\nPreventing and correcting cases in which people are unjustly, falsely or \nwrongly charged or sentenced. The Supreme People’s Court promulgated \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   95\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n96\n-\n-\nthe guidelines on improving the mechanism for preventing criminal cases \nin which people are unjustly, falsely or wrongly charged or sentenced, \nproviding that in a case in which there lacks sufficient evidence to convict \nthe defendant of a crime, the people’s court shall pronounce the defendant \ninnocent according to law, rather than imposing a relatively light penalty \nor otherwise imposing penalty on the defendant by leaving some leeway. \nOn December 2, 2016, No. 2 Circuit Court of the Supreme People’s Court \npublicly pronounced the judgment on the case of Nie Shubin suspected of \nintentional homicide and raping women, overruling the judgment of the \nlower court and pronouncing Nie Shubin innocent, thereby correcting the \njudgment on this major doubtful and complicated case that had lasting 22 \nyears, and reflecting that the people’s courts attach great importance to \njudicial protection of human rights and seriously observe the legal principles \nthat judgments shall be made upon evidence and presuming innocent until \nproven guilty and other legal principles. Since 2013, the people’s courts \nhave corrected the judgments on 46 major criminal cases involving 94 \npeople, in which cases, people were unjustly, falsely or wrongly charged or \nsentenced, including the case of Nie Shubin, the case of Hugjiltu and the \ncase of Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping (nephew and uncle), thereby greatly \nenhancing the public’s confidence in judicial impartiality. From 2014 to \n2018, the people’s courts at all levels pronounced 4,868 defendants innocent \nas per law, ensuring that the innocent will not be prosecuted under law.\nImproving the quick-track sentencing procedure for criminal cases and \nthe system of imposing lenient penalties on those who admit their guilt \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   96\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n97\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nand accept punishments. With the authorization of the Standing Committee \nof the National People’s Congress, since August 26, 2014, China has \nlaunched a two-year pilot reform on quick-track sentencing procedure for \ncriminal cases in 217 primary courts in Beijing and 17 other cities. During \nthe period of the pilot reform, the pilot courts tried and concluded 52,540 \ncriminal cases using the quick-track sentencing procedure, involving 54,572 \ndefendants in total, accounting for 35.88% of criminal cases in which not \nmore than one-year sentences were pronounced by such pilot courts in the \nsame period, and 18.48% of the criminal cases tried by such pilot courts \nin the same period; among such cases, 95.35% were concluded within 10 \ndays, 65.04 percent higher than those subject to the summary procedure, and \nthe judgments on 96.05% of such cases were announced at the court, 41.22 \npercent higher than those subject to the summary procedure. Haidian District \nPeople’s Court in Beijing has explored the mode of whole-course quick-track \nsentencing procedure to effectively reduce the time of circulation of cases \nat all the stages. Under the said mode, the average duration of the judicial \nprocedure in which the defendants were under detention was 33 days, about \n70% shorter than that of the similar cases concluded using the summary \nprocedure prior to the reform. Among all the cases subject to the quick-track \nsentencing procedure, the rate of plaintiffs filing appeals who also lodged \ncivil lawsuits was 0, the rate of defendants filing appeals was 2.01%, the rate \nof procuratorial organs filing protests was only 0.01%, and the overall rate \nof filing appeals or protests was 9.52 percent lower than that of the criminal \ncases taken as a whole. According to a third party assessment conducted by \nthe China University of Political Science and Law, the defendants’ rate of \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   97\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n98\n-\n-\nsatisfaction with the effect of the quick-track sentencing procedure reached \n97.69%. Through shortening pre-trial detention and passing sentences on \ndefendants quickly and leniently, the quick-track sentencing procedure can \ngive full play to the function of social correction, and help the offenders \nreform themselves and return to the society. In September 2016, the 22nd \nSession of the Standing Committee of the 12th National People’s Congress \nreviewed a report on the pilot reform, fully affirmed the efforts in these \npilot reforms, and decided to incorporate the pilot reform of quick-track \nsentencing procedure for criminal cases into the pilot reform of imposing \nlenient penalties on those who admit their guilt and accept punishments \nand to continue the pilot reform. Between September 2016 and September \n2018, a total of 281 pilot courts was identified, and 205,510 criminal cases \nwere concluded by applying the system of imposing lenient penalties on \nthose who admit their guilt and accept punishments, accounting for 53.5% \nof the criminal cases concluded by the pilot courts during this period. On \nOctober 26, 2018, at the 6th Session of the Standing Committee of the 13th \nNational People’s Congress, a decision was made on amending the Criminal \nProcedure Law to incorporate the achievements made in the pilot reform \nof imposing lenient penalties on those who admit their guilt and accept \npunishments into the newly amended Criminal Procedure Law and promote \nthem nationwide.\nDeepening the reform on standardization of sentencing. At the end \nof 2013, the Supreme People’s Court promulgated the guidelines on \nmeasurement of penalty by people’s courts to regulate the judges’ discretion \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   98\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n99\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nin measurement of penalty, which require setting up an independent debate \nprocedure regarding measurement of penalty, and promoting standardization \nof measurement of penalty throughout the country. In 2016, the Supreme \nPeople’s Court further extended the kinds of charges and punishments under \nthe pilot program on standardization of measurement of penalty by including \ndangerous driving and other seven charges into the scope of application of \nthe pilot program and extending the kinds of punishment from imprisonment \nand criminal detention to fines and probation. The Supreme People’s \nCourt designated some courts to carry out the pilot program to ensure the \nstandardization of measurement of penalty and the punishment meted out \nbeing appropriate to the crime committed. With this reform implemented, \nthe methodology in sentencing has become more standardized and scientific, \nand the sentences received have become fairer and more balanced, bringing \nabout a procedure with more transparency and fairness. \nStrictly regulating commutation of punishment, parole and temporary \nexecution of sentences outside prison. In April 2014, the Supreme People’s \nCourt issued the judicial interpretations regarding the hearing procedures \nfor commutation of punishment and parole, requiring establishment of the \nsystem of public hearing on commutation of punishment and parole and the \nsystem of periodic publication of typical cases. In 2015, the information \nwebsite on the cases of commutation of punishment, parole and temporary \nexecution of sentences outside prison granted by the courts nationwide was \nopened, to publicize the information of the whole process from case filing \nto judgment entering of the cases involving commutation of punishment and \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   99\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:02\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n100\n-\n-\nparole, so that commutation of punishment and parole is conducted under \nthe supervision of the public. In November 2016, the Supreme People’s \nCourt promulgated specific rules on law application in cases involving \ncommutation of punishment and parole，further clarify the application \nof commutation of punishment and parole，and unified the criteria of \ndeciding such cases, ensuring that fairness and equality are well addressed \ntherein.In November 2017, the Supreme People’s Court launched a national \nonline platform for processing cases involving commutation of punishment \nand parole.The new platform promotes the case information sharing and \nonline case-handling collaboration among the people’s courts and People’s \nprocuratorates and the penalty execution authorities and between the \npeople’s courts at all levels,ensuring the whole process of adjudicating \ncases involving commutation of punishment and parole traceable and under \nsupervision.\n Amending and improving court rules. In February 2015, the Supreme \nPeople’s Court and the Ministry of Public Security jointly issued a circular, \nproviding that when appearing in the court, the criminal defendants and \nappellants no longer need to wear their identification uniforms of detention \nhouses and the criminals in jail no longer need to wear their prison uniforms, \nand that when the people’s court brings a criminal defendant or appellant \nunder detention to trial, the detention house shall turn over the criminal \ndefendant or appellant in formal or informal wear to the people’s court to \nreflect modern judicial civilization. On April 13, 2016, the Supreme People’s \nCourt promulgated the newly amended Court Rules of People’s Courts of the \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   100\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n101\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nPeople’s Republic of China, further specifying the code of conduct in courts, \nin order to maintain court order, strengthen judicial protection of human \nrights, and make the courts be more open, convenient, civilized and safer \nand become venues where the people can experience fairness and justice.\nImproving the mechanism for protecting lawyers’ rights in practice \nin accordance with law. In December 2015, the Supreme People’s Court \npromulgated\t instructions on protecting lawyers’ rights in practice, \nrequiring protection of lawyers’ rights to know, access case files, appear in \ncourt, debate, defense, apply for gathering evidence, apply for excluding \nillegal evidence, lodge appeals on behalf of their clients, and providing \nprotection and convenience to lawyers in performing their duties under \nthe law.The mechanism of soliciting lawyers’ opinions in the review of \ndeath penalties has been established, which require protection of lawyers’ \nrights, including the right to access case filing information and case files, \nand provide that lawyers can directly make defenses to the judges of the \nSupreme People’s Court, so as to ensure the fairness of review of death \npenalties. In October 2017, the Supreme People’s Court and the Ministry of \nJustice  promulgated provisions on conducting pilot project of mandatory \nlegal representation in all criminal cases and launched the pilot in Shanghai \nand Zhejiang. On December 30, 2015, the Supreme People’s Court opened \nthe lawyer service platform, on which the lawyers can, among other things, \nfile cases, access case fillies and contact judges on online. As of the end \nof 2018, 1,924 courts nationwide had opened a lawyer service platform, \nproviding services to lawyers for a total of 1.27 million times. The lawyer \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   101\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n102\n-\n-\nservice platform of the Supreme People’s Court has provided 22,067 law \nfirms and 89,338 lawyers with services such as online case filing, online \naccess to case files, case inquiry, online payment, online refund, electronic \nservice, and contact with judges. In 2018, the number of visits to the lawyer \nservice platform was 43,527, which quadrupled the sum of the year 2017. \nThe courts at three levels in Zhejiang each established a lawyer service \ncenter to provide access to case information and files, meeting with judges, \nrest, dressing and other services, and explored the establishment of special \nfacilities at law firms for handling lawsuit-related matters on line.\nImproving the system of state compensation. The Supreme People’s Court \nhas formulated the interpretations on certain issues relating to the application \nof law in cases of criminal compensation, improved the cross-examination \nprocedure for compensation cases, standardized the measurement of \nconsolation payment for psychological injuries, and expressed opinions on \nfurther improving state compensation in criminal cases in which people are \nunjustly, falsely or wrongly charged or sentenced, so as to give full play \nof the function of remedy of state compensation. From 2014 to 2018, the \npeople’s courts at all levels accepted 31,434 cases of state compensation. \nThe victims unjustly, falsely or wrongly charged or sentenced or the close \nrelatives of those executed in criminal cases such as the case of Hugjiltu, the \ncase of Zhang Hui and Zhang Gaoping, the case of Nie Shubin and the case \nof Liu Zhonglin, have received compensation in a timely manner according \nto law. For example, Liu Zhonglin has received a state compensation of \nRMB 4.6 million from Liaoyuan Intermediate People’s Court in Jilin, the \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   102\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n103\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nauthority liable for compensation.\nImproving the judicial assistance system. In July 2016, the Supreme \nPeople’s Court promulgated the opinions on strengthening and standardizing \nthe work of national judicial assistance conducted by the people’s courts, \nrequiring unity of acceptance and handling of cases, scope of assistance, \nprocedure of assistance, standard of assistance, fund guarantee and \nappropriation of funds, to realize the administration of the assistance \nsystem by law and the handling of assistance cases according to judicial \nprocedures. On September 18, 2016, the Supreme People’s Court set up \nthe judicial assistance committee, and the local people’s courts at all levels \nalso set up their judicial assistance committees. In the work of judicial \nassistance, the courts in Tianjin have strengthened the joint actions with the \nassistance provided by other judicial authorities, social organizations and \nother provinces and cities, to realize seamless connection between judicial \nassistance and social security, and improve the accuracy, coverage and \ntimeliness of judicial assistance. The courts in Sichuan have simplified the \njudicial assistance application process, and developed an online judicial \nassistance platform, to realize online and standardized handling of cases of \njudicial assistance.\nStandardizing the judicial procedure for handling properties involved \nin cases. In October 2014, the Supreme People’s Court promulgated judicial \ninterpretations regarding the enforcement of property involved in  criminal \njudgments for the purpose of standardizing the enforcement of properties \ninvolved in criminal cases, including confiscation and recovery of properties, \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   103\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n104\n-\n-\nappraisal at the current price, handling of disputes in enforcement, etc. \nBetween 2015 and 2018, the Supreme People’s Court has, in conjunction \nwith the related authorities of the Central Government, constantly pushed \nforward the establishment of inter-departmental information platforms \nfor centralized management of properties involved in cases, improved the \nprocedures of advance disposal and pre-trial return of properties, defined \nthe interested parties’ right of action, and improved the remedy mechanism \nand the accountability system. In May 2015, the first inter-departmental \ncenter for the management of properties involved in criminal lawsuits in \nour country was established in Zhuji, Zhejiang. The center established a \ncentralized information platform for the management of properties involved \nin cases. All the public security, procuratorial and judicial departments are \nrequired to enter the information about the properties involved in cases \nunder their respective management into the platform, thereby realizing \nelectronic handover of properties involved in cases, facilitating the handling \nof cases and standardizing the procedures for handling properties involved \nin cases.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   104\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n105\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nV. Promoting people’s access to and benefits from the \njudiciary\nExercising judicial power for the people fairly is the primary work of \npeople’s courts. The people’s courts have been reforming the system of \nacceptance and handling of cases, strengthening the establishment of \nlitigation service centers and dispatched tribunals, improving the multiple \ndisputes resolution mechanism and the mechanism of separating complicated \ncases from simple ones, promoting reforms on family law trials and taking \nother measures, to constantly enhance the exercise of judicial power for the \npeople and make the people have a stronger sense of gain in the judicial \nreform.\n Comprehensively implementing the case filing registration system. \nSince May 1, 2015, the people’s courts have reformed the case filing \nsystem by introducing the case filing registration system and eliminating \nthe prior examination 3. This new system requires each case meeting the \nacceptance conditions shall be placed on file and be accepted and handled, \nthereby effectively protecting people’s right to file a lawsuit and completely \neliminating the institutional barriers causing the difficulties in case filing. As \nof the end of 2018, the courts nationwide registered over 64.89 million cases, \nwith an on-the-spot case registration rate of over 95%.  Courts nationwide \nhave simplified the case filing procedure and by means of notification of \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   105\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n106\n-\n-\ncase filing, once-and-for-all list of supplements and corrections, request \nfor response within prescribed time limit and otherwise, ensure successful \nfiling of cases by the litigants in one attempt.  The courts in Beijing \nintroduced a mechanism of supervision and complaints rapid-handling over \ncase filing, which enables the courts to promptly respond to and resolve \nlitigants’ complaints and problems therein. In 2016 alone, this mechanism \nsuccessfully resolve complaints lodged by more than 1,300 people, thereby \nensuring the effective implementation of the case filing registration system.\nThe implementation of this reform has been under stronger monitoring by \nthe Supreme People’s Court. Practices such as setting additional conditions \nto constrain case filing have been firmly forbidden in order to prevent the \ntargeted difficulties in case filing from rebounding.\n Diversifying the case filing routines. Relying on information technologies, \nthe people’s courts have been promoting a variety of convenient methods \nof filing cases, forming a new pattern of case filing with on-the-spot case \nfiling as main method, with online case filing, self-service case filing, cross-\nregional case filing, collaborative case filing and so forth as supplementary \nmethods. People now can file a lawsuit more conveniently and quicker, and \nthe efficiency of case filing has improved significantly. The courts in all \nregions have actively promoted online case filing while actively improving \nconventional channels for case filing such as on the spot of the courthouse, \nthrough appointment, and on site. Some courts actively explore cross-\nregional case filing service, enabling the litigants to file a lawsuit in a nearby \ncourt or any court chosen by them, and reducing the burdens of litigants \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   106\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n107\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nsupposed to travel. As of the end of 2018, 3,044 courts nationwide had \nintroduced online case filing service, and 2.38 million cases had been filed \nonline; 1,154 courts had provided cross-regional case filing service, and \n120,000 cases had been filed via the cross-regional filing systems ; 1,863 \ncourts had set up self-service case filing areas, and litigants or lawyers had \nfiled 1.03 million cases by themselves.  7 courts in Beijing, Tianjin and \nHebei have established a new mode of collaborative case filing mechanism, \nwhich allows litigants equal access to the inclusive, convenient and efficient \ncase filing services provided irrespective of whereabouts. The People’s \nCourt of Pudong New Area, Shanghai has developed a “QR code” self-\nservice case filing system, through which each case may be filed within 15 \nminutes on average.\nEnhancing modernization of litigation services. In December 2014, \nthe Supreme People’s Court promulgated the guidelines on promoting the \nestablishment of litigation service centers at people’s courts. As of the end of \n2018, 98% of the courts nationwide had established litigation service halls \nup to 1.82 million square meters in area, 2,995 courts had opened litigation \nservice websites, 1,623 courts had launched online litigation service Apps, \nand 2,813 courts had set up 12368 litigation service hotline. The courts at all \nlevels have been actively and creatively developing online platforms such \nas 24-hour self-service courts, online mediation rooms, digital case files \nservices, online video systems for complaints and appeals, and have been \nequipped with Intelligent Visitors Management Systems, Court-Operated \nRobotic Assistant, litigation assistance machines, litigation risk assessment \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   107\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n108\n-\n-\nmachines, convenient self-service terminals, intelligent cloud cabinets, \nsmart navigation and others alike. The services provided include online \ncase filing, online payment of fees, online mediation, access to information, \nsubmission of documents, examination of case files, electronic service of \nlegal process, contact with judges, etc, amounting to 48 functions which \nis 40 more than available sevices in 2009.  Along with the mechanism \nof separating complicated cases from simple ones，a combined mode, \n“cases identification + mediation + fast trial +proceeding expedition”, has \nbeen developed. Such mode well functions with staffs in charge of cases \nidentification, venues specialized for mediation, equipped courtrooms \nfor fast trials, optimized litigation-mediation coordination mechanism, \nplenty of judges and clerks specialized in fast trials, and an underlying \nelectronic system. Owing to this mode, the litigation service centers have \nbeen transformed into one-stop hubs resolving a majority of cases filed in \ncourts of first instance, fully exerting their roles as legal “clinics” of disputes \nresolution. Most courts nationwide have been carrying out reforms into this \nnew mode, 2,464 courts have appointed 14,669 cases identification clerks, \nand 12,234 full-time mediators have been recruited. As of the end of 2018, \nthe courts nationwide had resolved 1.71 million cases through the multiple \ndisputes resolution mechanism without proceeding into trial, mediated \n1.2 million cases after case filing, and resolved 1.75 million cases through \nfast trial in litigation service centers. The courts in Anhui have established \nfamily affairs, labor, property and other dispute mediation divisions at \ntheir litigation service centers, as well as workstations of representatives \nof the Party congress, people’s congress and people’s political consultative \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   108\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n109\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nconference, lawyer’s offices and people’s mediation rooms, and carried \nout online and remote mediations, multiple disputes resolution, achieving \nremarkable success. The courts in Zhejiang have been carrying out the ‘at \nmost one visit’ scheme, and have successfully alleviated citizens’ litigation \ncosts and burden by promoting services both online and offline. The courts \nin Tibet, Ningxia and other regions have set up circuiting courts in vehicles \nto provide easier access to justice for the people..\nImproving the multiple dispute resolution mechanisms. The multiple \ndispute resolution mechanism is an significant component of China’s efforts \nin modernizing the governance. In June 2016, the Supreme People’s Court \npromulgated the Opinions on Further Deepening the Reform of Multiple \nDispute Resolution Mechanisms in People’s Courts, proposing a “three-\nstep strategy”, “the state develops strategies for developments, the judiciary \nprovides legal safeguards, and advances relative legislative proceedings”. \nModernized conception of disputes resolution has been established as \n“State-led, judiciary-advanced, society participatory, multiple routines, and \nsafeguarded by rule of law”. The Supreme People’s Court, in conjunction \nwith the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry \nof Human Resources and Social Security, the Ministry of Civil Affairs, \nthe National Development and Reform Commission, the China Securities \nRegulatory Commission, the China Insurance Regulatory Commission, \nthe All-China Federation of Returned Overseas Chinese, the National \nFederation of Industry and Commerce, the All-China Women’s Federation, \nand other authorities respectively, has issued over 20 documents in respect \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   109\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n110\n-\n-\nof the litigation-mediation coordination mechanism, covering issues \nrelated to people’s mediation, family law disputes, securities and futures \ndisputes, insurance disputes, and  assigning auxiliary judicial affairs to \nnotary offices. These arrangements have constitutes a solid framework of \nmultiple disputes resolution mechanisms. The Supreme People’s Court has \npromulgated the Provisions on Mediation Services Specially Appointed \nby People’s Courts to instruct all regions to enhance litigation-mediation \ncoordination and promote timely and efficient resolution of contradictions \nand disputes. As of the end of 2018, the courts nationwide had established \n3,320 litigation-mediation coordination centers, and recruited nearly 22,194 \nspecially appointed mediation organizations and 78,153 specially appointed \nmediators, which had mediated 1,862,800 cases as assigned or entrusted \nby the courts. The people’s courts at all levels have established litigation-\nmediation coordination platforms in various forms which have operated \nin a standard manner and exercised the functions of cases identification, \ndesignated mediation before and after case-filing, after-case filing designated \nmediation and judicial confirmation, etc., and improved the mechanism of \nconnection between courts and administrative agencies, people’s mediation \norganizations, business-oriented mediation association, commercial \nmediation organizations, arbitration institutions and notary offices. By \ninnovatively combining “Internet and dispute resolution”, they establish \nunified online mediation platforms. As of the end of December 2018, \n1,258 courts had conducted online mediation and thereby resolved 11,394 \ndisputes. In 2018, the courts in Beijing referred 304,000 first-instance civil \ncases to the “multiple routines of mediation plus fast trial” mechanism, \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   110\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n111\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nand successfully concluded 176,000 cases via this mechanism, accounting \nfor 39% of the first-instance civil cases concluded that year. The courts in \nZhejiang have established an “online platform for diversified resolution of \ncontradictions and disputes” and formed a progressive and funnel-typed \nmechanism of filtering and resolving contradictions and disputes level by \nlevel. As of the end of November 2018, the platform had attracted 432,000 \nregistered users and 34,000 registered mediators, received over 240,000 \napplications for mediation, and successfully mediated 208,000 cases, with \na success rate of 88.17%. These courts inherited and innovated the “Maple \nBridge Experience” by upgrading “resolving small dispute before it goes out \nthe village” to “resolving dispute before it goes out the house”. Ma’anshan \nIntermediate People’s Court in Anhui has promoted the diversification \nreform further by conducting online mediation off site and remotely, \nachieving success in  95.1% online mediations. Meishan Intermediate \nPeople’s Court in Sichuan have fully mobilized and utilized various kinds \nof resources for dispute resolution, and solved 80.72% of controversies \nand disputes by means of alternative dispute resolution between 2014 and \n2016, with only 7.06% of cases entering into the judicial procedures to \nbe adjudicated, thereby creating the “Meishan Experience” connecting \nthe litigation and alternative dispute resolution. Heilongjiang Province, \nAnhui Province, Fujian Province, Shandong Province and Xiamen City, \nFujian Province have issued local regulations on diversified resolution of \ncontradictions and disputes, providing legal protection for dispute resolution \nand social governance.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   111\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n112\n-\n-\nEstablishing and improving the lawyer mediation system. In September \n2017, the Supreme People’s Court and the Ministry of Justice jointly issued \nopinions on the pilot program of lawyer mediation, and launched the pilot \nprogram in 11 provinces (and municipalities directly under the Central \nGovernment) such as Beijing, Heilongjiang and Shanghai. Within one year \nafter the launch, the pilot courts established 657 lawyer mediation rooms, \nand included 1,290 lawyer mediation organizations and 12,360 lawyer \nmediators in their panel of specially appointed mediation organizations \nand mediators; these lawyers participated in the mediation of 54,898 cases \nand successfully mediated 25,569 cases; they made 8,529 applications \nfor judicial confirmation, issued 824 payment orders, and made 3,325 \napplications for enforcement of mediation agreement, effectively exploiting \ntheir advantages and playing their role in dispute resolution. 63% of the \ncourts nationwide have established a system for lawyers to lodge appeals on \nbehalf of their clients, and 78% of the courts nationwide have established \na system for lawyers to reside in courts. As of the end of 2018, the lawyers \nresiding in the courts nationwide have accepted 791,932 cases, lodged \n26,942 appeals on behalf of their clients, and participated in the resolution \nof  27,499 disputes.\nPushing forward the reform of the mechanism of separating complicated \ncases from simple cases. In September 2016, the Supreme People’s Court \npromulgated the opinions on furthering separation of complicated cases \nfrom simple cases and optimizing the allocation of judicial resources. In \nMay 2017, the Supreme People’s Court promulgated operating rules for \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   112\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n113\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nseparating complicated civil-commercial cases from simple ones and resort \nto mediation and fast trial, to instruct the courts at all levels to optimize \nthe allocation of judicial resources, to innovate and improve the working \nmechanism, and to alleviate the caseloads. The Supreme People’s Court \nhas formulated the criterion of model courts for piloting in separating \ncomplicated cases from simple cases and designated 80 such courts. In 2018, \nthe number of cases concluded according to summary procedures increased \nby 38.81% compared with 2014. Courts nationwide have actively carried out \ncreative mechanisms such as court trial focusing on essential factors, writ, \nand exemplary litigation to deepen the reform, address the new problem of \nrapid increase in the number of cases, shorten the case-handling period, and \nimprove judicial efficiency. Most primary courts in Jiangsu have established \ndivisions for fast adjudication of small claim cases, each of which comprises \none judge and one clerk, adopts the mode of adjudication focusing on \nessential factors, simplifies the written judgments, announces judgments \nex tempore in principle, and concludes a case within 20 days on average, \nwith nearly 70% of cases dropped after mediation. Shenyang Intermediate \nPeople’s Court in Liaoning has actively implemented the system of pre-\ntrial meeting to handle procedural issues, such as notification of rights \nand obligations, petition for excusing judges, clarification the respective \narguments of the plaintiffs and defendants, ascertaining non-disputed facts, \nidentification of the points at issue, and urging the parties involved to submit \nevidences related to such points at issue. Since the launch of the reform, the \nduration of court trial has been reduced by about 50 minutes on average.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   113\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n114\n-\n-\nDeepening the reform of the system of handling letters and visits \ninvolving lawsuits. The Supreme People’s Court has been actively \npromoting the handling of letters and visits involving lawsuits in accordance \nwith the law. The courts at all levels have been improving the working \nmechanism of separating litigation from letters and visits and solving the \npeople’s lawful and reasonable claims with earnest efforts. The Supreme \nPeople’s Court has established an online platform for complaints, enabling \nlitigants to check anytime anywhere about the progress and result of a \ncomplaint provided that information about the complaint and appropriate \nmaterials submitted. This further unblocks the complaint channels and \nalleviates people’s burden. The Supreme People’s Court has launched an \nonline video system to receive complaints, which is connected with the \ncourts at four levels nationwide, enabling the Supreme People’s Court, local \npeople’s courts and complainants to communicate face-to-face remotely, \nwhich reduces the visits to Beijing by about 30%. The Supreme People’s \nCourt has preliminarily established a national platform for courts to \nhandle letters and visits involving lawsuits, to gather relevant information \non the nationwide scale, and functions well in respects of publication \nand submission of the information of letters and visits, supervision \nof the handling of letters and visits, and realizing quick and accurate \ncommunication between the lower and upper courts consequently improves \nthe efficiency and unified the coordination mechanism.\nPushing forward the reform of the approaches and working \nmechanisms for family law cases. In April 2016, the Supreme People’s \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   114\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n115\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nCourt issued the guidelines on carrying out the pilot reform of the approach \nand working mechanism for family law cases, exploring the ways to solve \nfamily disputes in a professional, socialized and people-oriented manner, and \nactively pushing forward the pilot reform. The pilot courts have made efforts \nin establishing family divisions or collegial panels for family law disputes, \nintroducing domestic disputes investigator, social worker, child psychologist \nand others alike to provide mental guidance and other expertise to the parties \ninvolved, and advancing the integration of judicial, administrative and social \nresources, which constitutes a new mechanism for comprehensively solving \nfamily law disputes. On July 19, 2017, the Supreme People’s Court took the \nlead in establishing a joint meeting mechanism involving 15 authorities for \nadvancing this reform. On July 18, 2018, the Supreme People’s Court issued \nopinions on further deepening the reform of the approach and working \nmechanism for family law cases. The courts in Hebei, Shandong, Zhejiang, \nFujian, Shaanxi, Qinghai, Gansu, Tibet and other regions have established \na similar joint meeting mechanism, contributing to the establishment \nof a working pattern where party committees exercise leadership, local \ngovernments fulfill their duties, courts lead, and the public participates. \nThe high people’s courts in Liaoning, Inner Mongolia, Anhui, Ningxia, \nGuangxi and other regions have formulated comprehensive procedures for \nadjudicating cases in regard to family law cases. The courts in Chongqing, \nQinghai and other regions have strengthened the psychological assessment \nand intervention in handling cases, effectively preventing civil cases from \ndeteriorating into criminal cases; Putuo District People’s Court in Shanghai \nhas created the mechanism of “representative of children’s interests” where \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   115\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n116\n-\n-\nthe staff members at the Office of National Working Committee on Women \nand Children act as representatives to effectively protect the legitimate \nrights and interests of juveniles through independent investigations, \nevidence collection and participation in court trials; Linfen Intermediate \nPeople’s Court in Shanxi has been  exploring a mechanism of revisiting the \nparties and provides supports, so that the humanistic care from the socialist \njudiciary could be felt. Xicheng District People’s Court in Beijing and \nYiling District People’s Court in Yichang, Hubei have been actively trying a \ncooling-off period in marriage mechanism in divorce cases.\nPushing forward pilot reform of integrated online data processing in \nrespect of disputes over damages in road traffic accidents. In response to \nthe prominent problem of rapid increase and lengthy resolution procedures \nof disputes over traffic accidents, the Supreme People’s Court initiated \na comprehensive pilot project, the integrated digital database of traffic \naccidents disputes resolution, in Yuhang District, Hangzhou. In November \n2017, the Supreme People’s Court and the Ministry of Public Security, the \nMinistry of Justice, and the China Insurance Regulatory Commission held \na joint meeting. At this meeting, they decided to jointly carry out the above-\nmentioned pilot reform in 14 provinces and municipalities including Beijing. \nThe pilot, integrates digital data in respect of responsibility determination by \nthe traffic management authority, damages calculation by relevant entities, \nmediation, appraisal, litigation, damages paid by insurance company, and so \non, and further realizes information sharing and joint actions, enabling case \nhandled on one platform, insurance policy paid out through one click, quick \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   116\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n117\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nprocessing, and to make dispute resolution more convenient and quicker. In \n2017 and 2018, nearly 370,000 and 360,000 first-instance civil disputes over \ndamages in traffic accidents were mediated across the country respectively. \nIn some pilot regions, due to the reform, the disputes referred to courts have \ndropped by 50%.\nReforming and improving the service system for civil litigations. In \nJuly 2017, the Supreme People’s Court issued certain opinions on further \nstrengthening service in civil litigations, proposing to comprehensively \npromote the mechanism of confirming litigants’ address for service, to \nunify the format of conformation of address for service, to standardized \nthe content of such conformation and to actively explore electronic service \nand effective way of preserving proof of service, in order to improve \nthe quality and efficiency of service for civil litigations, and address the \n“difficulties in service” stumbling civil trials. Zhejiang Wenling People’s \nCourt, has set up a service management center, equipped it with 9 full-time \nstaff members, developed management software, opened an official WeChat \naccount for the service management center, strengthened cooperation with \npostal service, and preliminarily digitalized, intensified and standardized the \nmanagement of the whole process of service, thus improving the efficiency \nof service. Jingyang District People’s Court in Deyang City, Sichuan has \ncut 50% of service costs through a variety of methods such as electronic \nservice, entrusted service by notary offices, and agreements-based service, \nand judicial advice. Owing to the implementation of electronic service, for \nthose cases involving insurance contracts, the duration for service has been \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   117\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n118\n-\n-\nshortened by over 5 days, and the entire trial has been shortened by over 10 \ndays.\nEnhancing the establishment of detached tribunals. In December 2014, \nthe Supreme People’s Court promulgated certain opinions on further \nstrengthening the work of detached tribunals in the new context to instruct \nall regions to strengthen the development of detached tribunals, in order \nto truly achieve the goal of exercising judicial power for the people. It has \nactively developed the structure of courts relying mainly on central courts \nand supplemented by community courts and circuit adjudication venues, and \noptimized the regional layout of people’s courts and distribution of judicial \npersonnel. The courts in Henan have established an information center, \nnetworking and sharing data among all detached tribunals in the province, \nand developed the electronic signature system, the function of cross-regional \ncirculation of digital case files and realized cross-county (city) filing of \ncertain cases, enabling litigants to file cases with local courts or people’s \ntribunals. The courts in Chongqing have pushed forward the development of \ntribunal liaison points and established litigation stations, in order to facilitate \nthe filing of lawsuits by the public.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   118\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n119\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nVI. Solidly Advance the “Basically Solving the Difficulties in \nEnforcement” Campaign\nEnforcing the judgments that has come into force is the “last mile” towards \njudicial justice, significantly concerns the authority and public credibility \nof the judiciary. In March 2016, at the 4th Session of the 12th National \nPeople’s Congress, the Supreme People’s Court proposed to “basically solve \nthe difficulties in enforcement within two to three years”. In April 2016, \nthe Supreme People’s Court issued the Roadmap for Basically Solving \nthe Difficulties in Enforcement within Two to Three Years, setting the \noverarching goal of “basically solving the difficulties in enforcement”. To \nachieve the goal on time, the Supreme People’s Court further set five core \nindicators for this ongoing phase: over 90% of the cases with available \nproperty for enforcement should be enforced within the statutory period; \nover 90% of the cases without available property for enforcement should \ndiscontinue the enforcement in compliance with the law; over 90% of the \ncases with letters and visits involving enforcement should be resolved or \nconcluded; over 90% of the courts nationwide should achieve the foregoing \ngoals; and the overall closure rate of enforcement cases in the last three \nyears should exceed 80%.\nSince the goal of “basically solving the difficulties in enforcement” \nwas proposed, the people’s courts have comprehensively promoted the \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   119\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n120\n-\n-\ninformatization and standardization, continuously deepened the reform of \nthe system and management model of enforcement, continued to strengthen \npersonnel capabilities, and reinforce the supports. From 2016 to the end of \n2018, the courts nationwide accepted 20,435,378 enforcement cases and \nenforced 19,361,165 cases, with total enforced value amounting to RMB 4.4 \ntrillion, and the year-on-year increase during this period reached 98.45%, \n105.09% and 71.2% respectively.\n Advancing an overarching governance structure in respect of solving \nthe difficulties in enforcement.  In June 2016, The Central Leading \nGroup for Comprehensively Deepening Reforms (CLGCDR) considered \nand approved the opinions on accelerating the development of a credit-\nmanagement system for the supervision over, alerting and punishing \ndishonest persons subject to enforcement. 31 provinces (and autonomous \nregions and municipalities) have issued endorsing documents, and  Standing \nCommittees of 12 Provincial , Autonomous Regional and Municipal \nPeople’s Congress have passed motions to support the campaign of people’s \ncourts. So far, the overarching governance structure for overcoming \nthe difficulties in enforcement has emerged, featuring leadership by the \nCPC party committees, coordination by CPC Political and Legal Affairs \nCommission, supervision by the people’s congress, support from the local \ngovernments, organization by courts, cooperation by other corresponding \nauthorities, and participation of the public. With continuous adjustments, this \nstructure has laid a solid foundation for “basically solving the difficulties in \nenforcement”.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   120\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:03\n\n\n121\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\n Developing an online property search and seizure system. In response \nto problems such as low efficiency of enforcement, limited coverage of \nproperties, and high human resources costs in the traditional mode of \nproperty search and seizure, the Supreme People’s Court has established an \nonline property search and seizure system at the central government level, \nwhich connects the networks of 16 central government agencies (including \nthe Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Civil Affairs, the Ministry \nof Natural Resources, the Ministry of Transport, the People’s Bank of \nChina, and the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission) and \nthose of over 3,900 banking financial institutions. Through this system, the \nproperty information of the persons subject to enforcement officers may \ncheck has been expanded into 25 sub-categories under 16 categories, such \nas real estate, deposits, financial investments, vessels, vehicles, securities \nand online funds nationwide, which effectively covers majority of the forms \nof properties and related information. It greatly improves the efficiency of \nenforcement, and fundamentally changes the methods adopted. As of the \nend of 2018, the courts nationwide have searched and seized property in \n60.38 million cases via this new system, with acquiring 9.84 million pieces \nof information of houses, lands and other forms of real estate, information \nof 51.42 million vehicles, 142.1 billion shares of securities, 1.939 million \nvessels, and RMB 25.71 billion online funds, and a total of RMB 413.6 \nbillion frozen. Thereby, the rights and interests of the prevailing litigants are \neffectively safeguarded.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   121\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n122\n-\n-\nImproving the system of joint punishments on dishonest persons subject \nto enforcement. In 2013, the Supreme People’s Court established the \nsystem of blacklist of dishonest persons subject to enforcement and started \nto promote joint punishments on dishonest persons subject to enforcement, \nstriving to crack down on the acts of maliciously avoiding enforcements. \nSince 2016, the Supreme People’s Court has signed memorandums with the \nNational Development and Reform Commission and other 60 authorities, \nadvancing a credit-management system for the supervision over, alerting \nand punishing dishonest persons subject to enforcement. 150 punishment \nmeasures under 37 sub-categories of 11 categories are utilized to prevent \ndishonest persons subject to enforcement from serving as civil servants, \nCPC party representatives, members to the people’s congress, and members \nof the people’s political consultative conference. They may also receive \nconstraints in traveling, house purchasing, investing, bidding and calling for \nbids, and so on. As of the end of 2018, the courts nationwide had publicized \n12.88 million blacklisted dishonest persons, out of which 17.46 million \nreservations of air tickets and 5.47 million of bullet train or high-speed rail \ntickets were rejected. 3.51 million dishonest persons subject to enforcement \nhave fulfilled their obligations under such pressure.\nPromoting online judicial auctions. In order to overcome the shortcomings \nof conventional auction methods, the Supreme People’s Court, absorbing \nand distilling the experiences of online judicial auctions in lower courts,  has \nestablished a new judicial auction mode that online auctions are general and \ntraditional auctions are exceptional, and promulgated judicial interpretations \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   122\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n123\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nregarding online judicial auctions, requiring full promotion of online judicial \nauctions nationwide and improvement of related supporting systems from \nJanuary 1, 2017. Up to now, 92.5% of the courts nationwide (namely 3,260 \ncourts) have fully adopted online auctions, and over 80% of the judicial \nauctions have been conducted online. Owing to the implementation of \nonline judicial auctions, the successful auction rate and premium rate have \nincreased exponentially, and the rate of failed auction and price reduction as \nwell as the auction costs has dropped significantly. Online actions effectively \neliminate the rent-seeking probabilities, cut off the illegal interest chain, \nand bring about “zero complaint” about violation of laws and disciplines \nduring auctions. From its launch in March 2017 to December 2018, the \ncourts nationwide have conducted over 940,000 online auctions and thereby \nsold over 270,000 items for RMB 604.9 billion, with successful auction rate \nof 70.8% and premium rate of 64.3%, and saving commissions of RMB \n18.6 billion for litigants. To tackle the low efficiency of appraisal during \njudicial auctions, courts nationwide have diversified methods of appraisal \nsuch as bargaining between litigants, targeted inquiries, online inquiries \nand entrusted appraisals, and have established a unified online appraisal \nplatform. With appraisals becoming more standardized and informatized, \nthe efficiency of property disposal has been improved and the burden on \nlitigants has been alleviated.\nImproving the management of enforcements. Since 2013, the Supreme \nPeople’s Court has been striving for a normative enforcement system, and \nhas promulgated 55 judicial interpretations and regulatory documents in this \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   123\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n124\n-\n-\nregard. In particular, since 2016, 37 judicial interpretations and regulatory \ndocuments regulating property preservation, property investigation, \nenforcement settlement, enforcement guaranty, presupposed arbitration \nand other issues have been promulgated to strengthen the system, reify the \nrules, and effectively restrain and regulate the enforcement-related power. \nSince 2014, the courts nationwide have carried out a comprehensive check \non the enforcement cases pending in the past 20 years, and entered over \n16 million cases into the enforcement case management system, laying \na solid foundation for an orderly, precise, comprehensive and intelligent \nmanagement of the enforcement cases. A new mode of enforcement \nmanagement has been established to put all courts in this country under \n“unified management, unified coordination, and unified command”, \ntransforming the management into a new flat structure being more \nintensified, visualized, standardized, and intelligent. A unified enforcement \ncase handling platform has been established so that all the enforcement \nofficers nationwide work on the same platform, harmonizing the standards \nand procedures for enforcement cases, and strengthening the control over \nkey nodes. An unified enforcement command and management platform \nhas been established. With its nearly 20 functions including enforcement \ncoordination, property management, complaints and appeals, and proceeding \nsupervision, this platform realized the progress that enforcement information \ncan be publicized at “one-stop” and case handling can be pressed via “one-\nclick”. In response to the difficulties in overseeing the handling of letters \nand visits involving enforcement, the unified system also included all the \ninformation of letters and visits involving enforcement, through which the \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   124\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n125\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nentire process of handling is recorded, traceable, and managed precisely.\nDeepening the reform of the enforcement system and mechanisms. \nThe pilot reform of the separation of adjudication power and enforcement \npower within the people’s courts has been advanced actively and steadily. \nThe Supreme People’s Court has promulgated opinions on improving \ncoordination of case filing, adjudication and enforcement, in order to \nstrengthen the interactive engagements between case filing, adjudication, \nenforcement and preservation procedures. A team-based working structure \nhas been established with judges as the team leader and legal assistants, \nclerks, judicial police and other auxiliary judicial personnel as the supporting \nmembers, which maximizes the utility of human resources for enforcement. \nThe practice that property preservation applicants obtain insurance from \nprofessional insurers has been comprehensively promoted, which backs \napplicants struggling to provide collaterals and contributes to the increase of \napplications of property preservation measures. In response to the deficit of \nthe judicial assistance fund, the Supreme People’s Court, on the basis of the \napproved pilot projects in Ningbo courts, has explored methods to expand \nthe capital source, such as insuring the judicial assistance funds. In 2018, the \ngranted judicial assistance fund amounted to RMB 650 million.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   125\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n126\n-\n-\nVII. Deepening Judicial Openness and Judicial Democracy\nOpenness is the best means of anti-corruption. Since 2013, according \nto an overall integrated arrangement, by upholding to the principle of \nlegality, voluntary, comprehensive  and substantive disclosure, the Supreme \nPeople’s Court has been simultaneously promoting the construction of four \ndisclosure platforms for judicial process, court trials, written judgments, \nand enforcement procedures to improve judicial openness and transparency. \nUnder the principle that disclosure is the general rule unless it meets the \nexceptional conditions defined by law, it has been promoting judicial \nopenness in all areas and at all links of the adjudication and enforcement by \nthe people’s courts to ensure that all contents that should be disclosed and \ndelivered to the public properly. In November 2018, the Supreme People’s \nCourt promulgated opinions on further deepening judicial openness to \ncontinuously expand the breadth and depth of judicial openness.\nPromoting the openness of judicial process. In November 2014, the China \nJudicial Process Information Online was officially opened. Now, it has \nbecome a platform for centralized gathering and unified publishing of the \ninformation about the judicial process of the courts nationwide, providing \n“one-stop” disclosure service to the parties to the cases adjudicated by the \ncourts nationwide. From the date of acceptance of a case, the parties to \nthe case and their lawyers can, by entering their valid certificate numbers, \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   126\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n127\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nlog onto the platform to check and download the process information and \ndocuments relating to the case at any time, and receive procedural legal \nprocess online. In March 2018, the Supreme People’s Court promulgated \nprovisions on the disclosure of judicial process by the people’s courts \nthrough the Internet, clarifying that, except  information involving state \nsecrets, with confidential requirement or limited access in specified by laws, \nall the four categories of judicial process information, namely procedural \ninformation, information about other matters rising in litigation process, \nlegal documents, and court transcripts, shall be disclosed to litigants and \ntheir legal representatives, attorneys, and mandatory legal representation \nproperly. As of the end of December 2018, the China Judicial Process \nInformation Online had released 229,377,909 pieces of information about \n4,609,074 cases, with a disclosure rate of 99.43%, and had received over \n34,530,649 page views and sent 18,145,449 pieces of text messages; and on \nthis platform, the courts nationwide had released a total of 1,536,570 pieces \nof information in the column “Disclosure to the Public”.\nPromoting the openness of court trials. On December 11, 2013, the China \nCourt Trial Live Broadcasting Website was opened. In September 2016, \non the basis of comprehensively upgrading the China Court Trial Live \nBroadcasting Website, the Supreme People’s Court officially opened the \nChina Court Trial Online, thereby realizing the collection and authoritative \nrelease of videos of court trials conducted at the people’s courts at all levels. \nSince July 1, 2016, the Supreme People’s Court has provided online live \nbroadcasting of the court trials of all the cases that can be made public \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   127\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n128\n-\n-\naccording to law. Through this website, the public can watch the court trials \nof cases that are conducted at the courts nationwide in real time, demand \nvideos of court trials, access statistical information of court trials broadcast \nlive, and store and share such videos and information through their Weibo \nand WeChat accounts, thereby realizing full coverage, real-time release \nand in-depth openness of court trial information. As of the end of 2018, \nthe China Court Trial Online had broadcasted live over 2.3 million court \ntrials with over 13.8 billion clicks. The people’s courts at all levels have \nattached great importance to the openness of court trials of major cases, \nand broadcast live the courts trials of a lot of major cases drawing wide \nattention, such as the retrial of Archangelos Gabriel salvage case and the \nseries case of administrative disputes over “Qiaodan” trademark. On January \n7-8, 2016, Haidian District People’s Court in Beijing broadcast live the \nentire court trial of the case of “Qvodplay” suspected of seeking profits by \nspreading pornographic items, which lasted for more than 20 hours, attracted \nover 1 million viewers, and simultaneously posted 27 long Weibo messages \nreporting the entire court trial, which accumulatively received over 36 \nmillion views.\nPromoting the openness of written judgments. In November 2013, \nthe Supreme People’s Court opened the China Judgments Online as the \ncentralized platform for the openness of written judgments nationwide, and \ntook the lead in publishing the judgments made by it on the website. Since \nJanuary 1, 2014, all the effective judgments made by the people’s courts at \nall levels have been published on the China Judgments Online. In November \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   128\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n129\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\n2015, the China Judgments Online underwent a revision by adding the \nfunctions such as one-click intelligent search, search of related documents \nand personalized services, and realized the openness of written judgments in \nfive languages of minority nationalities, including Mongol, Tibetan, Uygur, \nKorean and Kazak, available for viewing and downloading. On August 30, \n2016, the mobile client App of the China Judgments Online was officially \nlaunched. Since August 2016, the China Judgments Online has received over \n20 million page views every day. On August 29, 2016, the Supreme People’s \nCourt promulgated the amended provisions on the publication of judgments \nby people’s courts on line, listing all the types of judgments that should be \nmade public, and requiring that all the judgments shall be published on line \nexcept those involving state secrets, crimes committed by persons under \nlegal age, cases settled through mediation or in which mediation agreements \nare homologated, divorce actions or upbringing and guardianship of minor \nchildren; judgments involving personal privacy shall be published on line \nafter redacting the contents involving personal privacy; the judgments of \nfirst instance that have been appealed or protested shall also be published on \nline and linked to the corresponding judgments of second instance; and with \nrespect to the judgments not made public, to the extent not disclosing any \nstate secrets, the case numbers, courts trying the cases, dates of judgment \nand reasons for non-disclosure shall be stated. The mode of publication \nof judgments has been changed from the traditional mode of centralized \npublication by special organs into the mode of one-click publication \nby the judges handling the cases on the case handling platform, and the \nmechanisms for handling the complaints lodged and comments made by the \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   129\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n130\n-\n-\npublic and for public supervision of judgments have been established, so \nas to put the openness of written judgments under the supervision all social \ncircles. As of the end of 2018, the China Judgments Online has published \nover 62 million judgments, received over 21 billion page views from more \nthan 210 countries and regions worldwide, and become the largest judgment \ndatabase in the world.\nPromoting the openness of enforcement information. Since November \n2014, the Supreme People’s Court has begun to release the information \nof persons subject to enforcement, the list of dishonest persons subject \nto enforcement by the courts nationwide, information of enforcement \nprocess and the decisions on enforcement on the China Enforcement \nInformation Online in a centralized manner, thus realizing unified, timely, \nand automatic disclosure of information about enforcement cases, persons \nsubject to enforcement, discontinued current enforcement cases, and \nonline judicial auction, and other information of the courts nationwide. On \nSeptember 14, 2016, the WeChat account of “China Enforcement” opened \nby the Supreme People’s Court was officially launched on line, which \nprovides the functions of access to enforcement information, publication of \nenforcement regulations, interpretation of laws and regulations, publication \nof enforcement documents, etc., so that the public can access enforcement \ninformation and receive judicial services anytime anywhere. As of the end \nof 2018, the enforcement information release platform had announced 12.88 \nmillion dishonest persons subject to enforcement.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   130\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n131\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nPromoting the openness of corporate bankruptcy information. In \nAugust 2016, the Supreme People’s Court issued provisions on disclosure \nof information about corporate bankruptcy cases, and officially opened \nthe National Enterprise Bankruptcy and Restructuring Case Information \nDisclosure Platform, which becomes an online information platform for \nreleasing various information about bankruptcy cases, and on which the \nlegal process, notices of recruitment of administrators, notices of recruitment \nof investors, notices of asset auction and other relevant information are \nsimultaneously published. In 2018, the information about 29,856 bankruptcy \ncases was disclosed through the National Enterprise Bankruptcy Information \nDisclosure Platform.\nExpanding the breadth and depth of judicial openness. The Supreme \nPeople’s Court has published the Gazettes of the Supreme People’s Court, \nWork Reports of the Supreme People’s Court and the Annual Work Reports \nof the People’s Court (in Chinese and English) on a regular basis, as well \nas the white papers on the situation of judicial protection of intellectual \nproperty rights in China, on the trial of maritime cases, on the trial of \nenvironmental and resource cases, on the trial of administrative cases, on \nthe judicial reform and on the judicial openness, and released the judicial \ndocuments and information about major cases and the work of courts to \npeople at home and abroad. The Supreme People’s Court has established the \nJudicial Case Academy and opened the Online version (https://anli.court.\ngov.cn/static/web/index.html#/index), which, supported by the big database \nand the Information Technology, collects and publishes a large number of \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   131\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n132\n-\n-\nChinese and foreign cases, and intelligently produces typical cases widely \nrecognized, thus promoting clear and defined guides to the society. The \nChina Judicial Case Academy Online with columns such as “Hot Issues”, \n“Case Method” and “Case Forum”, has been leading the legal practitioners \nto participate in the collection, generation, research and communication \non judicial cases, striving to become a new platform for case studies. The \npeople’s courts at all levels have been making efforts to improve judicial \nopenness by means of court official  websites and accounts, Court Weibo \nand WeChat, mobile news client APPs, court president’s letterboxes, \nliaison platforms of members of people’s congresses and people’s political \nconsultative conferences, open days and otherwise.\nOn December 31, 2014, the governmental service website of the Supreme \nPeople’s Court underwent a comprehensive revision and opened the litigation \nservice website to facilitate consultations, inquiries, appointment for case \nfiling, online examination of case files and contact with judges by the \nlitigants, among other things. On December 15, 2015, the Supreme People’s \nCourt opened its English website. Since 2013, the Supreme People’s Court \nhas opened its official accounts on the major domestic Weibo platforms \nincluding Sina Weibo, Tencent Weibo and Renmin Weibo platforms, and \npress rooms for the courts nationwide on such Weibo accounts. As of the \nend of 2018, the three official Weibo accounts owned over 57.953 million \nsubscribers, posted 44,000 pieces of Weibo messages, and received 5.084 \nmillion reposts and comments. The official WeChat account of the Supreme \nPeople’s Court was opened in November 2013, and had posted 3,909 pieces \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   132\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n133\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nof image-text messages and had 1,044,000 subscribers as of the end of \n2018. Since January 2015, the courts nationwide have adopted the Monthly \nUpdates Press system. From 2014 to 2018, the Supreme People’s Court had \nheld 114 news presses, released 76 judicial documents and circulated 53 \nreports on working progress. From 2015 to 2018, 477 typical cases in total \nhave been made public through briefings on typical cases. The Supreme \nPeople’s Court held the China-ASEAN Justice Forum, the BRICS Justice \nForum and the Environmental Justice Sub-forum of Boao Forum for Asia, \nthe Conference of Presidents of Supreme Courts of China and Central and \nEastern European Countries, the Silk Road (Dunhuang) International Forum \non Judicial Cooperation, the Forum on the Rule of Law in Cyberspace – \nSmart Court, the Conference of Presidents of Supreme Courts of China \nand Portuguese-speaking Countries, and the 13th Conference of Presidents \nof Supreme Courts of the Member States of the Shanghai Cooperation \nOrganization, and other major events of foreign affairs related to justice. It \nhas established friendly relations with the highest judicial authorities of over \n140 countries and regions, 18 international and regional organizations and \nhas signed cooperation agreements with the highest judicial authorities of \n43 countries and 2 international organizations; in doing so, it has told a good \nstory about the rule of law in China and transmitted the sound of the rule of \nlaw in China, effectively enhancing the international image and influence of \nChina’s judiciary.\nReforming the system of people’s assessors. In May 2015, with the \nauthorization of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   133\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n134\n-\n-\nthe Supreme People’s Court and the Ministry of Justice jointly issued the \npilot program to reform the system of people’s assessors and the measures \nfor the implementation of the pilot program. The two-year pilot program has \nbeen conducted at 50 courts selected in 10 provinces, autonomous regions \nand municipalities directly under the Central Government. The items of the \npilot program includes, among other things, reforming the requirements for \nthe appointment of people’s assessors, improving the mode of appointment \nof people’s assessors, expanding the scope of participation in trials, defining \nthe powers to participate in trials, enhancing job security, establishing \nthe withdrawal mechanism, giving full play to the advantage of people’s \nassessors in being familiar with the social situations and public opinions, \nand gradually realizing the goal that people’s assessors no longer vote on \nissues relating to the application of law and only participate in the finding \nof facts. In order to further address the problems arising in the pilot reform, \nin April 2017, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress \ndecided to extend the pilot period by one year. In April 2018, the Standing \nCommittee of the National People’s Congress considered and passed the \nreport of the Supreme People’s Court on the pilot reform of the system of \npeople’s assessors, which was successfully completed. The pilot reform \nhas achieved remarkable accomplishments, including “four conversions”: \nthe appointment of people’s assessors has transformed from mainly relied \non recommendations by social organizations to random selection; the \nscope of the discretionary power of people’s assessor’s in trials has been \nnarrowed down from full participation to only factual issues; the maximum \nnumber of people’s assessors in a collegiate panel has been enlarged from \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   134\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n135\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\n3 to more than 7; and the evaluative assessment on the cases heard with \nthe people’s assessors has shifted from “quantity” to “quality”. After the \nreform, the people’s assessors come from more diverse background with \na sound structure, and fulfill their responsibility more actively. In April \n2018, the Law on People’s Assessors of the People’s Republic of China was \npromulgated, legally incorporated the improvements in the pilot reform \nof the system of people’s assessors. The Ministry of Justice, the Supreme \nPeople’s Court, and the Ministry of Public Security issued measures for \nappointment of people’s assessors, and established the appointment of \npeople’s assessors mainly based on random selection and with supplement \nmethods of individual applications and organization recommendations.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   135\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n136\n-\n-\nVIII. Promoting Scientific and Classified Management over \nJudicial Personnel\nAccording to the overall arrangement by the State and in cooperation with \nrelated departments of the Central Government, the Supreme People’s Court \nhas fully reformed the judicial personnel management system. \nEstablishing a system for classified management of judicial personnel. \nIn response to the problem that the past judicial personnel management \nsystem did not fully reflect the characteristics of the judicial profession, \nthe Supreme People’s Court has actively promoted the reform of the \nsystem for classified management of judicial personnel, by classifying the \njudicial personnel into judges, auxiliary judicial personnel and judicial \nadministrative personnel, and adopting different management systems for \ndifferent categories of personnel, to ensure that each of judges, auxiliary \njudicial personnel and judicial administrative personnel is assigned to a \ndefinite post of duty and attends to his own duties. As of the end of 2018, the \nproportion of judges, auxiliary judicial personnel and judicial administrative \npersonnel had reached 34.6%, 49.5% and 15.9% respectively.\nFully implementing the judge quota system. In line with the principle \nof determining quota based on cases, selecting personnel based on job \nrequirements, controlling total number, and making overall planning at \nthe provincial level, through well-designed examination and assessment \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   136\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n137\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nprocedures, the courts nationwide have selected a total of 125,000 judges \nfrom the former 210,000 judges. The newly-selected judges are mainly \nplaced on adjudicative posts rather than general administrative posts, \nand over 85% of judicial personnel resource are allocated to trial work, \noptimized the resource allocation and the team structure. All higher people’s \ncourt have strictly honored the maximum quota and ratio determined by the \nCentral Government, and according to the number of cases handled, and \nthe situations of economic and social development, population and other \nbasic figures of the places where the courts are located, the level of trial and \nfunctions of the courts, workloads of judges, staffing of auxiliary judicial \npersonnel and other factors, have implemented a system of unified allocation \nof judge quota among the courts at three levels within one provincial \njurisdiction and providing priority to the primary people’s courts and the \narea where the conflicts between caseload and personnel is serious. Mainly \non the amount of cases, Guangdong courts decided that the proportion of \njudges should be lower than 30% in Shantou where there are fewer cases \nbut exceed personnel, and be higher than 50% in Shenzhen, Dongguan, \nZhongshan and other cities where there are overloaded cases but relatively \nfewer staffs. A mechanism of  exchange and removal of judges has been \nestablished, and a mechanism of dynamic management of quota has been \ngradually formed, whereby one may be appointed or removal as judge and \nan appointed judge may be promoted or demoted. As of June 2018, 5,938 \njudges nationwide have been removed due to  post transfer, reassignment, \nresignation, retirement, and disqulification, or the like.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   137\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n138\n-\n-\nReforming the judge selection and appointment system. The courts at \nthe provincial level have established judge selection committees comprising \njudge representatives and relevant civilians, and formulated open, fair \nand just judge selection and appointment procedures, to ensure that only \noutstanding legal practitioners who are upright in character and have rich \nexperience and a high professional level will become judge candidates. In \norder to improve the system of selection of judges level by level, in May \n2016, the Organization Department of the CCCPC, the Supreme People’s \nCourt and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate jointly promulgated the \nopinions on establishing the system of selection of judges and public \nprosecutors level by level, which express provide that the judges of the \npeople’s courts at the prefecture level or above shall be selected level by \nlevel generally. In October 2015, the Supreme People’s Court, after strict \nselection procedures, selected 7 outstanding judges from 62 applicants \nfrom local courts nationwide. In March 2014, the Supreme People’s Court \nconducted a program of publicly selecting high-level judicial talents from \nexperts, scholars, lawyers and other personnel practicing law, and finally \nselected five persons, including experts, scholars, senior lawyers and \noutstanding public prosecutors, from 195 applicants. In 2015, the courts in \nShanghai publicly selected one judge from outside the judicature, and the \ncourts in Qinghai publicly selected three judges from outside the judicature. \nThe courts in Shanghai, Guangdong, Fujian and other regions have begun to \nselect judges from outstanding judge assistants and send them to serve in the \nprimary people’s courts.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   138\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n139\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nReforming the rank of posts and compensation & benefit system \nof judges. A system of independent rank of posts of judges has been \nestablished so that: registered judges could be managed according to such \nindependent ranking order, judges’ professional ranks are separated from \ntheir administrative ranks, and judges are promoted based on their seniority, \non a selective basis or specially; a personnel management system for \njudges that is different from that for other public servants and reflects the \nprofessional characteristics of judges has been implemented, which will \nbroaden the career development channels of grassroots judges and enhance \nthe professional honor and work enthusiasm of judges. As of the end of \n2018, all courts nationwide had established a mechanism for determining \nthe independent rank of posts of judges, about 98% courts had begun to \npromote judges along with their seniority, and about 52% courts had begun \nto promote judges on a selective basis. A compensation & benefit system \nhas been established, supporting the series of reforms of independent rank \nof posts of judges, and all courts nationwide have introduced the new salary \nsystem involving performance-based bonus, which greatly increased the \nsalary level of judges. By actively coordinating with  related departments \nof the Central Government, the Supreme People’s Court has formulated \npolicies on post exchange, retirement age, medical benefit,, travel allowance, \ntraffic subsidy, and others benefits for judges, noticed those implementation \nof policies, and promoted the courts at all levels to effectively place these \npolicies.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   139\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n140\n-\n-\nReforming the system of recruiting and training auxiliary judicial \npersonnel. The Supreme People’s Court, in cooperation with related \ndepartments of the Central Government, has issued opinion on recruiting \njudge assistants by people’s courts. All regions have conducted unified \nindependent recruitment at provincial level in an orderly way, and steadily \nadvanced the position transfer of unadmitted judges and qualified clerks \nto judge assistant, to equip the courts with more judge assistants. In April \n2017, the Supreme People’s Court, together with the Ministry of Finance \nand the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, launched a plan \nfor reforming the system on managing clerks, with a focus on the problems \nsolving that the management of contracted clerks was not standardized \nenough, the professional protection provided to contracted clerks is not \nstrong enough, and the team of contracted clerks is not stable enough. \nThe courts in all regions have expanded the sources of auxiliary judicial \npersonnel and explored the improvement of the system on managing and \ntraining auxiliary judicial personnel, with a focus on optimizing the structure \nof auxiliary judicial personnel. Since the reform, the number of auxiliary \njudicial personnel in Beijing courts has increased 68.8% from 2,689 to \n4,538; the ratio of number of judges to that of auxiliary judicial personnel \nin Shanghai courts has changed from 1:0.75 to 1:1.78. The Jiangsu Higher \nPeople’s Court has vigorously pushed forward the reform of the clerk \nsystem, formulated the standards of the rank of posts of clerks and measures \nfor the training and evaluating clerks, properly defined the posts, the quantity \nand responsibilities of clerks, and provided that the proportion of first-line \njudges to clerks shall be 1:1.1, thereby changing the situation that  several \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   140\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n141\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\njudges assisted by one clerk in the past.\nEstablishing the legal research scholar and legal intern systems. The \nSupreme People’s Court has established legal research scholar and intern \nsystems, and received 30 legal research scholars and 313 legal interns, \nwhich enhances its judicial cooperation and exchanges with law schools \nand research institutes, and improves the legal practitioner training \nmechanism. Most local courts have enhanced their cooperation with law \nschools and established a system of receiving  interns from law schools as \njudge assistants, who  participate in the auxiliary judicial work under the \nguidance of judges, alleviated the difficulty of understaffed judge assistants \nin the people’s courts, and explored a new mode of classified management \nof judicial personnel. Chengdu Intermediate People’s Court in Sichuan \nhas signed a cooperation agreement on  a mechanism of “ Judge Assistant \nInternship” with 11 colleges and universities including Sichuan University, \nSouthwestern University of Finance and Economics and University of \nElectronic Science and Technology of China, by launching a program of \nintern judge assistants on campuses, whereby the colleges and universities \nin cooperation could select and send outstanding law graduates (or \nundergraduates) to participate in the auxiliary judicial work. So far, a total of \n304 interns of five phases have engaged in this program.\nStrengthening the professional ethics of the judiciary. In order to \ncomprehensively strengthen the professional quality of judges and abide by \nthe professional ethics of the judiciary, the people’s courts have improved \nthe unified vocational training system and entry/promotion oath ceremony \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   141\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n142\n-\n-\nand the professional ethics standards, code of professional conduct and \nprofessional ethics evaluation mechanism for judges. In conjunction with \nthe related departments of the Central Government, the Supreme People’s \nCourt has issued the relevant documents, prohibiting judicial personnel \nfrom entering into six ways of intercommunications with litigants, lawyers, \nspecially interested parties or agencies, requiring judicial personnel handling \ncases to host litigants, lawyers, especially interested parties or agencies at \nworking places and during working hours, and prohibiting judicial personnel \nfrom acting as attorneys or mandatory legal representation in any cases \nhandled by the judicial organs he resigned, and  prohibiting those from \npracticing law for life who have been dismissed from public office due to \nviolation of the law and discipline.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   142\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n143\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nIX. Improving the System and Mechanism of Judicial Service \nand Securing National Development\nThe people’s courts shoulder an important mission for protecting the \npolitical security of the country, ensuring the stability of the overall society, \ndefending social fairness and justice, and guaranteeing that people live \nand work in peace and satisfaction. Based on their judicial functions, the \npeople’s courts at all levels have deepened the reform of the judicial system \nby strengthening adjudication and enforcement, to promote the formation \nof a new pattern of reform and opening-up at higher lever and create a more \nstable, fair, transparent and predictable business environment under the rule \nof law.\nEnabling the mechanism of judicial service and protection for the \nnational development strategy. The Supreme People’s Court has issued \ndocuments on providing judicial protection for improving the business \nenvironment under the rule of law. Higher People’s Courts of Beijing and \nShanghai have also improved relevant judicial policies, committed to create \nan international environment for doing business under the rule of law. In the \nDoing Business 2019 released by the World Bank, China scored 78.97 in \nthe indicator of “performing contract”, which indicator is ranked the 6th in \nthe world, and closely related to the judicial efficiency, judicial cost, judicial \norgan, judicial procedure and informatization level. The Supreme People’s \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   143\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n144\n-\n-\nCourt has issued opinions on providing judicial service and protection for \nthe coordinated development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, the development of \nthe Yangtze River Economic Belt, and the rural revitalization strategy, and \nhas innovated the judicial collaborative working mechanism, to provide \njudicial service and protection for the major strategic development of the \ncountry. It has improved the risk monitoring and warning mechanism in \nfinancial adjudication, established a big database for financial cases, and \nimproved the information sharing and distribution mechanism for preventing \nfinancial risk.\nImproving the international commercial dispute resolution mechanism \nin relation to “The Belt and Road”. In June 2018, the Supreme \nPeople’s Court promulgated judicial interpretations on the establishment \nof international commercial tribunals, and formulated supporting rules \nsuch as working rules for international commercial expert committees \nand guidelines on procedures of international commercial tribunals. The \ninternational commercial tribunals may entrust members of international \ncommercial expert committees and international commercial mediation \nagencies to mediate international commercial disputes, and support \ndomestic qualified arbitration institutions with international reputation \nin carrying out international commercial arbitration involving “The Belt \nand Road”, so as to create a system for diversified resolution mechanism \nof international commercial disputes with interconnected and supportive \nmediation, arbitration and litigation. On June 29, 2018, the No. 1 and No. \n2 International Commercial Tribunals of the Supreme People’s Court were \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   144\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:04\n\n\n145\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nestablished and officially opened in Shenzhen and Xi’an respectively.\nPerfecting the system of judicial protection of property rights. In \nNovember 2016, the Supreme People’s Court issued opinions on fulfilling \nthe role and function of the judiciary to effectively strengthen the judicial \nprotection of property rights and made comprehensive arrangements for \nimproving the judicial protection of property rights. By upholding the \nconcepts of equal, comprehensive and legitimate protection, the people’s \ncourts ensure that all types of property right owners should be given equal \ntreatment on legal status and law application, strictly distinguish economic \ndisputes from criminal offences, and resolutely prevent transferring civil \nobligations to criminal offences. The Supreme People’s Court has published \ntwo batches of typical cases regarding protection of property rights and \nentrepreneurs’ rights and interests, and has legally identified and corrected \nsome property-right-related cases in which people are unjust, falsely or \nwrongly charged or sentenced, such as the case of Zhang Wenzhong, which \nhas good social impacts.\nStrengthening the reform and innovation in IP adjudications. In \nNovember 2017, at the first meeting of the 19th CLGCDR, the CLGCDR \nmembers reviewed and approved the Opinions on Certain Issues \nConcerning Strengthening the Reform and Innovation in Adjudication of \nIP Cases, and proposed to improve the IP judicial system by improving the \nexamination mechanism and evidence rules on of validity of rights in line \nwith the characteristics of IP adjudication and establishing a compensation \nrules based on marketing value for IP infringement. On April 20, 2017, the \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   145\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n146\n-\n-\nSupreme People’s Court issued outlines of judicial protection of intellectual \nproperty rights in China (2016-2020), which clarify the basic principles, \nmain objectives and key measures for judicial protection of intellectual \nproperty rights. In July 2016, the Supreme People’s Court issued the \nopinions on promoting three-in-one trial of civil, administrative and criminal \nIP cases at the courts nationwide, requiring that the IP adjudication divisions \nof all the people’s courts at all levels shall be renamed IP tribunals, which \nshall be responsible for the trial of all the civil, administrative and criminal \nIP cases.\nImproving the system and mechanism of judicial protection for \necological resources. The Supreme People’s Court has issued documents \nto provide judicial protection for comprehensively promoting the \necological civilization construction and greenness development. All regions \nhave strengthened the establishment of specialized judicial organs for \nenvironmental and resource cases. In June 2014, the Supreme People’s \nCourt established the Environmental and Resource Tribunal. As of the end \nof December 2018, 22 higher people’s courts, 110 intermediate people’s \ncourts and 257 primary people’s courts had established specialized judicial \norgans for environmental and resource cases; the courts nationwide had \nestablished 1,270 tribunals, collegiate panels and circuit tribunals for \nenvironmental and resource cases in total, including 390 tribunals, 808 \ncollegiate panels, and 72 circuit tribunals. As required by the plan for pilot \nreform of ecological damage compensation system, all regions have actively \nexplored adjudication rules for a provincial government to bring claims \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   146\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n147\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nfor ecological damages. As of 2018, the courts nationwide had accepted \nand handled 20 cases claiming for and judicial homologation of ecological \ndamage compensation.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   147\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n148\n-\n-\nX. Improving the Judicial Management System and the \nJurisdiction System\nSince 2014, in cooperation with related departments of the Central \nGovernment, the Supreme People’s Court has promoted the reform of \njudicial management system, adjusted the jurisdiction system, improved \nthe system for safeguarding the authority of judicature, and facilitated \nthe creation of a favorable institutional and social environment trusting, \nrespecting and supporting judicature.\nPromoting centralized management of personnel, financial and material \nresources of local courts below provincial level. The reform of the judicial \nmanagement system by promoting centralized management of personnel, \nfinancial and material resources of local courts below the provincial level \nreflects that the judicial power is a power of the Central Government in \nnature. All the regions have advanced the work of centralized management \nin an open, transparent and democratic manner relying on the provincial \nplatforms. The size and composition of local courts below provincial level \nin a provincial-level region are subject to management by the provincial \ncommission department with the assistance of the higher people’s court \nin that region. The commission departments at municipal or county level \nare no longer responsible for the management of size and composition of \ncourts within their respective jurisdictions. Each provincial-level region has \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   148\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n149\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nestablished the mechanism that the judges of local courts below provincial \nlevel are subject to nomination, management, appointment and removal \naccording to the legal procedures by the provincial-level government \nin a centralized manner. Judge assistants are recruited and employed by \nprovincial-level public server management departments in conjunction with \nhigher people’s courts in a centralized manner. Junior judges are subject to \nprofessional qualification examination by provincial-level judge selection \ncommittees, and nomination, appointment and removal according to the \nlegal procedures by provincial-level governments in a centralized manner. \nThe provincial-level regions have also explored the reform of centralized \nfunding management system for local courts below provincial level in light \nof their respective local conditions. In 18 provinces, autonomous regions \nand municipalities directly governed by the Central Government such as \nBeijing, Tianjin and Shanxi and 2 cities specifically designated by the state \nplan namely Dalian and Shenzhen, the funds required by local courts below \nprovincial level are managed in a unified way by the provincial level, and \nall the courts at the provincial, municipal and county levels are classified as \nfirst-level budgetary units and prepare and submit their respective budgets \nto the provincial-level financial departments; their budgetary funds are \nappropriated from the central payment system of the Treasury.\nImproving the trial-level system. In order to adapt to the situations of \neconomic and social development, and reasonably defining the respective \nfunctions of the courts at four levels, the Supreme People’s Court \nadjusted the thresholds for the jurisdiction of the higher people’s courts \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   149\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n150\n-\n-\nand intermediate people’s courts over civil and commercial cases of first \ninstance, and increased the threshold of the subject value of civil and \ncommercial cases of first instance under the jurisdiction of primary people’s \ncourts; provided that major, difficult and complicated cases, new types of \ncases and typical cases in terms of application of law may be adjudicated \nby a people’s court at a higher level as determined by it in its sole discretion \nor at the request of a people’s court at a lower level. In February 2015, the \nSupreme People’s Court promulgated the judicial interpretations on issues \nconcerning strict application of order for retrial and remand for retrial in the \nsupervisory procedure for the trial of civil cases, which unify the standard \nfor order for retrial and review of cases, strictly prohibit remand for retrial \nat will, and request that if a people’s court at a higher level orders to retry a \ncase or remands a case for retrial, it shall elaborate in the ruling the detailed \nreasons for such order for retrial or remand for retrial.\nConducting pilot reform of trans-regional centralized jurisdiction over \nadministrative cases. Considering that an administrative case is subject \nto jurisdiction of the court in the place where the administrative organ \nas the defendant is located and may be subject to interference by local \nadministrative organs, according to the overall arrangement by the Central \nGovernment, the courts in all regions have been exploring the establishment \nof a system of jurisdiction over administrative cases relatively separate from \nadministrative divisions, through escalation of the jurisdiction to the higher \nlevel, cross-jurisdiction among different regions, relatively centralized \njurisdiction and otherwise, carrying out reforms of the jurisdiction system \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   150\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n151\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nwith different characteristics, to practically solve serious problems in \nadministrative lawsuits, such as difficulty in case filing, difficulty in \ntrial and difficulty in enforcement. In June 2015, the Supreme People’s \nCourt promulgated the opinions on trans-regional centralized jurisdiction \nover administrative cases, instructing certain higher people’s courts to, \naccording to their respective local conditions, designate some courts to \nexercise jurisdiction over trans-regional administrative cases, so as to \nintegrate resources of administrative adjudication and improve the judicial \nenvironment for administrative adjudication. The higher people’s courts \nin Fujian, Shandong, Henan, Guangdong, Hubei, Hunan and other regions \nassigned the jurisdiction over certain administrative cases of first instance \nto some designated primary or intermediate people’s courts other than the \ncourts originally having the jurisdiction over such cases, so as to eliminate \nthe public’s concern about local protectionism, through fairly adjudicating \nall kinds of administrative cases as per law.\nImproving the system of specialized adjudication of and centralized \njurisdiction over environmental and resource cases. The courts at \nall levels have been exploring the mode of specialized adjudication of \ncivil, administrative and criminal environmental and resource cases. The \nEnvironmental and Resource Tribunals of the Supreme People’s Court hear \nand adjudicate civil and administrative environmental and resource cases \nin a centralized manner. 16 higher people’s courts such as those in Jiangsu \nand Fujian hear and adjudicate civil and administrative environmental \nand resource cases or civil, administrative and criminal environmental \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   151\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n152\n-\n-\nand resource cases in a centralized manner. The courts in all regions \nhave been exploring the mode of centralized jurisdiction over trans-\nregional environmental and resource cases, based on the characteristics \nof environmental and resources protection in each region. The higher \npeople’s courts in Jiangsu, Henan, Hainan, Hubei and other regions have \nbeen exploring the centralized jurisdiction over environmental and resource \ncases within each of the ecosystems or ecological functional zones such \nas river basins and sea areas, and have been exploring the jurisdiction and \nadjudication mode more matching the characteristics of the ecological \nenvironment laws, to effectively prevent local protectionism and enhance \necological environmental protection.\nStrengthening the system requiring principals of administrative organs \nto appear in the court to respond to charges as per law. In July 2016, \nthe Supreme People’s Court issued a notice requiring the people’s courts \nin all regions to further regulate and promote response to administrative \nlawsuits pursuant to the relevant provisions of the Administrative Procedure \nLaw of the People’s Republic of China, and providing that if the principal \nor related staff members of an administrative organ do not appear in the \ncourt personally and just appoint an attorney to appear in the court, or if the \nprincipal of an administrative organ fails to appear in the court at the written \nrequest of the people’s court, the people’s court shall record the fact in the \ncase file and state it in the judgment, and may issue public notices thereon \naccording to law, and suggest that the appointing authority, supervisory \nauthority or the administrative organ at the higher level should impose \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   152\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n153\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nserious punishments on the responsible persons. In Jiangsu, the rate of \nappearance of principals of administrative organs in the court to respond to \ncharges has remained above 90% for two consecutive years, in particular, \nthe rate of their appearance in the court has been above 90% in Nantong \nand other eight prefecture-level cities, and reached 100% in Kunshan and \nother 58 counties (cities and districts); while in Hai’an County, the three \nconsecutive heads of the County have appeared in the court to respond to \ncharges and the rate of appearance of principals of administrative organs \nin the court to respond to charges has remained 100% for six consecutive \nyears.\nImproving the system for safeguarding the credibility of lawsuits and \nthe authority of judicature. The Supreme People’s Court, in conjunction \nwith the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, amended \ncertain charges under the Criminal Law, to further safeguard the authority \nof judicature. The Ninth Amendment to the Criminal Law of the People’s \nRepublic of China adopted on August 29, 2015 further defined the offences \nof refusal to execute judgments or rulings, added an offence under the \nCriminal Law and inserted the provisions regarding offences committed by \nentities; amended the offences of interference with court order by defining \nthe acts of beating up the parties to lawsuits, or insulting, defaming or \nthreatening the judicial personnel or parties to lawsuits, or refusing to obey \nthe court’s order to stop such acts or otherwise seriously interfering with \ncourt order as offences; and added the offences of false charges by defining \nthe acts of bringing any civil lawsuit on the ground of fabricated facts, \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   153\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n154\n-\n-\ndisturbing the judicial order or otherwise seriously damaging the legitimate \nrights and interests of others as offences. In June 2016, the Supreme People’s \nCourt promulgated the guidelines on preventing and punishing the persons \nlodging false charges, instructing the courts in all regions to identify the \nelements of false charges, and enhance the examination of and punishment \nagainst false charges, to safeguard the credibility and order of lawsuits.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   154\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n155\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nXI. Advancing the Construction of Intelligent Courts\nSince 2013, the people’s courts have conscientiously implemented the \ninnovation-driven strategy, the national cyber development strategy, the big \ndata strategy, and the new-generation artificial intelligence development \nplan, and comprehensively strengthened the construction of intelligent \ncourts. The open, and intelligent online Apps have been comprehensively \ndeveloped, and the main framework of court informatization version 3.0 has \nbeen established, which greatly promotes the modernization of the judicial \nsystem and judicial capability.\nEnhancing the formulation of top-level informatization planning \nand standards. The Supreme People’s Court has issued the Five Year \nDevelopment Plan on Informatization of People’s Courts 2016-2020, \nclarifying the key tasks and specific requirements for the construction of \nintelligent courts. In accordance with the guidelines of “systematic projects, \nstandards first”, the Supreme People’s Court has improved the system of \nstandards for informatization of the people’s courts, developed and released \n85 technical standards focus on the case data standards, to support the \ninformation resource sharing and exchange, R&D, information security and \nhigh quality and efficiency operation and maintenance system construction. \nIt has issued certain provisions on the Numbers of Cases Handled by \nPeople’s courts and supplementary standards, the Case Information Standard \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   155\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n156\n-\n-\nfor People’s courts (2015) and other normative documents to implement \ncode-based management of 3,500 courts nationwide, built a three-level case \ntypes system, thereby laying a solid foundation for building a new standard \nsystem for case information.\nStrengthening the construction of informatization infrastructure and \nsecurity system. The courts at all levels have been constantly upgrading \nand improving the court network systems to support online handling of all \njudicial matters, including specific court network, mobile network, specific \nexternal network, confidential intranets and Internet. Over 3,500 courts and \nover 10,000 detached tribunals across the country have connected with the \nspecific court network. Over 28,000 scientific and technological courtrooms \nhave been established nationwide to realize multimedia evidence discovery, \nremote trial, audio and video recording of court trials, and automated voice \nrecognition in process, and other functions. The Supreme People’s Court \ntook the lead in proposing and establishing a high quality and efficiency \noperation and maintenance guarantee system, and building and using \nvisualized operation and maintenance management tools, which horizontally \ncover the five major network systems, vertically run through five layers, \nnamely infrastructure, judicial application, data management, information \nsecurity, and operation & maintenance.\nFully promoting electronic litigation. For further development in the \nInternet era, to promote the innovation of litigation mode and mechanism, \nthe courts at all levels have been vigorously promoting electronic litigation \nfor whole-process online. The Supreme People’s Court has been instructing \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   156\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n157\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nand promoting the courts nationwide to deploy five online standard modules \nfor case filing, payment, evidence exchange, hearing, and electronic \ndocuments service. The courts in Jilin, Zhejiang, and Jiangsu have fully \nestablished and widely used these modules. Zhejiang took the lead in \npiloting in Ningbo and promoting across the province “Mobile WeCourt”, \nan one-step mobile litigation platform on WeChat small procedures, which \nenables the litigants handles more than 20 judicial matters online, such \nas case filing, inquiry, mediation, court trial, enforcement and payment. \nMobile WeCourt has reduced the average time consumption for the courts \nin Ningbo, Zhejiang to adjudicate first-instance civil and commercial cases \nby 17 days, the average time consumption to enforce by 28 days, and the \nfigures of litigants’ complaints on “judges are often too busy to contact” by \nnearly 30%.\nDeveloping and applying a criminal trial intelligent assistant system. \nAccording to the Central Government’s plan for pushing forward the reform \nof the litigation system with a focus on trials, Shanghai has developed a \ncriminal trial intelligent assistant system with high-techs such as big data, \ncloud computing, and artificial intelligence to formulate uniformly evidence \nstandards applicable and evidence rules and embed them in the criminal \ncase handling system of public security organs, procuratorial organs, courts, \nand judicial administrative organs, so as to help staff on duty to collect and \nexamine evidence in a legal, comprehensive, and standardized manner, \nand ensure that the facts of cases found during investigations, prosecutions \nand trials are legitimate and that the whole process of handling criminal \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   157\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n158\n-\n-\ncases should be visualized, recorded and supervised, so as to reduce the \narbitrariness of the judiciary and effectively prevent the occurrence of \nunjust, falsely or wrongly charged or sentenced cases.\nStrengthening the intelligent assistance in case trial and judicial \nmanagement. In August 2016, the Supreme People’s Court issued \nguidelines on Comprehensively Promoting the Simultaneous Generation \nand In-depth Application of Electronic Case Files by People’s courts, for \nthe purpose of promoting the electronic archiving of case files and the \nuploading to the case handling system, creating conditions for online case-\nhandling and the intelligent assistance in case trial for judges. Relying on \nthe big data management and service platform, the Supreme People’s Court \nhas generated the information about cases files of courts nationwide, which \nlays the technical foundation for a court to access the electronic case files \nof another court. The Supreme People’s Court has established the “Faxin” \nplatform to build a world-class legal information service, gather various \nacademic resources, cases, professional practices and improvements, and \nprovide comprehensive, convenient and intelligent service for searching and \ndelivering legal academic resource to different groups such as judges, legal \nprofessionals, scholars  and the public. All regions have developed a voice \nrecognition system for trials, which can automatically transform voice into \ntexts. Suzhou Intermediate People’s Court in Jiangsu has implemented the \nsystem to support over 27,000 court-hearings, with aaccuracy rate of voice \nrecognition above 90%, and with which  trial time shortened by 20%-30% \non average.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   158\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n159\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nHaving informatization and big data serve judicial management and \ndecision making. The Supreme People’s Court has built a big database \nto collect, manage, and analyze the judicial information from the courts \nnationwide and provide information services in need. This big database \ncollects the information about the case acceptance and closure by the courts \nnationwide in real time, automatically updates such information every 5 \nminutes, and collects information about 70,000 to 80,000 cases every day. \nIt is now the world’s largest database of judicial information and supports \nthe analysis on the information about case acceptance and closure by the \ncourts nationwide and the distribution of cause of action of these cases. In \n2016, the courts nationwide fully realized the integration of judicial statistics \nwith the big data management and service platform, which indicates that \nthe people’s courts have completely ended the history of manual justice \nstatistics. As needed by the quantitative personnel performance evaluation, \nthe big data management and service platform connects and integrates the \ncollected personnel data and case data, put forward the central method of \njudicial personnel management shifting from qualitative to quantitative.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   159\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n中国法院的司法改革（2013—2018）\n160\n-\n-\nConclusion\nThe new round of the reform of judicial system has been both problem-\noriented and goal-oriented, starting from the deep-seated problems affecting \njudicial impartiality and inhibiting judicial capability, and the problems \ninvolving the direct and realistic interests that the public care most; such \nreform has been observing all the time the laws of justice while proceeding \nfrom China’s actual conditions, exploring the road of reform of the judicial \nsystem with Chinese characteristics, focusing on building and improving the \nsocialist judicial system with Chinese characteristics, and has been pushed \nforward step by step by operation of law, and combined top-down design \nwith exploration through pilot programs, so as to ensure that the reform will \nbe conducted in a vigorous and steady manner.\nThe people’s understanding and support are the driving force behind the \njudicial reform, and the people’s sense of gain is the standard for evaluating \nthe judicial reform. In light of the new challenges in the new era, the \npeople’s new expectations and new progress in science and technology, the \njudicial reform of China’s courts will always be pushed forward and never \nbe finished. In the next step, the people’s courts will, follow the guidance \nof Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New \nEra, hold high the great banner of reform and opening up in the new era, \n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   160\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05\n\n\n161\n-\n-\nJudicial Reform of Chinese Courts（2013-2018）\nand unremittingly pursue the goal to make the public experience fairness \nand justice in each judicial case, make the fair, efficient and authoritative \nsocialist judicial system with Chinese characteristics more mature and \nwell-established, comprehensively improve the competency, efficiency and \ncredibility of the judiciary, create a better environment for socialist rule of \nlaw, advance the judicial civilization to a higher level, and strive to make the \npeople obtain fair and just outcomes in every judicial case.\n法院的司法改革（2013-2018）.indd   161\n2019/03/01,星期五   17:42:05","difficulty":"easy","domain":"Single-Document QA","length":"short","question":"According to the report, how to promote the construction of smart courts?","sub_domain":"Financial"}

Source: https://huggingface.co/datasets/zai-org/LongBench-v2

initial import

Posting: /agents

GET /api/v1/write?intent=publish&task_id=357eb2e2-5e77-5620-9fad-823911d77f95&body={url_encoded_text}&agent_name={optional_name}&nonce={optional_random_id}