The following is a translation prepared by the Congressional-Executive Commission on China of the "Circular Regarding Further Improving Open Court Session Work in Second Instance Death Penalty Cases" issued by the Supreme People's Court on December 7, 2005. The Chinese text was retrieved from the PRC Ministry of Justice LegalInfo.gov Web site on December 8, 2005. A summary of the projected impact of this circular is available here.
Supreme People's Court Circular Regarding Further Improving Open Court Session Work in Second Instance Death Penalty Cases
Court Decree Number 214 (2005)
To the high people’s courts in each province, autonomous region, and municipality directly under the central government, the military affairs tribunals of the People’s Liberation Army, and the branch courts of the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region Production and Construction Corps:
In order to carry out requirements related to the “Second Five-Year Reform Plan of the People’s Courts” for reform and improvement of adjudication procedures in death penalty cases, and in accordance with regulations under the Criminal Procedure Law concerning opening court sessions in second instance cases, notice is hereby given as follows regarding issues arising in the opening of court sessions in death penalty cases by the Supreme People’s Court, pursuant to second instance adjudication procedure:
1. Fully recognize the importance and necessity of further improving second instance open court session work in death penalty cases. In death penalty cases, which are matters of life and death, it is necessary to apply extremely strict and cautious adjudication procedures. Opening court sessions in second instance death penalty cases is an important measure for strictly implementing the Criminal Procedure Law and carrying out the “Second Five” reform plan of the people’s courts. It also improves adjudication procedures in death penalty cases, is a necessary requirement for ensuring quality in death penalty cases, is conducive to a strengthening of judicial protection of human rights, and is conducive to a systemic guarantee of justice and caution in death penalty judgments. Each high people’s court must attach a high level of significance to this, consolidate thinking, earnestly strengthen its sense of responsibility and urgency, organize itself with utmost care, proceed carefully, overcome hardship, bring about the conditions, make opening of court session in second instance death penalty cases an important component of today’s work to be fully grasped, and ensure complete implementation thereof.
2. Each high people’s court shall, at the same time that it remains committed to opening court session in second instance death penalty cases protested by a People’s Procuratorate, beginning January 1, 2006 open court session with respect to all second instance death penalty cases in which significant factual and evidentiary issues give rise to an appeal, and, in the second half of 2006, also actively bring about conditions for which open court sessions can be carried out for all second instance death penalty cases.
3. Each high people’s court shall open court session in death penalty appeals and protested cases, and shall focus its examination on the reasons for the appeal or the protested case, and other issues that the court believes are necessary to investigate and are relevant to conviction or sentencing. Upon this foundation, and in strict accordance with regulations under the Criminal Procedure Law, it shall conduct a comprehensive examination of the facts and applicable law adduced in the judgment of first instance. It must, in accordance with the special characteristics of opening court session in second instance death penalty cases, improve second instance adjudication procedure and the manner of opening court session, ensure the quality of cases, and increase the efficiency of case handling.
4. In open court sessions in second instance death penalty cases, witnesses and forensic authenticators in the following circumstances shall appear in court: (1) the prosecution and defense parties are in dispute about the witness’s deposition or authenticator’s conclusions, and the deposition or authentication conclusions have significant impact on conviction or sentencing; (2) the court otherwise believes they should appear in court to testify.
5. Each high people’s court must, under the leadership of the local Party committee, actively strive for support from the government and relevant bureaus, in order to earnestly resolve all ensure and issues related to the persons, finances, and equipment involved in open court session in second instance death penalty cases. It must strengthen collaboration with procuratorial agencies and judicial administration departments, strive for support and coordination, guarantee that public prosecutors and lawyers appear in court, and ensure that open court session in second instance death penalty cases is conducted smoothly.
Please implement in accordance with the above circular. Please report promptly to our court on the circumstances of implementation and issues encountered.
December 7, 2005
