Beijing Court Announces Reform of Judicial Disciplinary System

October 4, 2006

Chi Qiang, President of the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court (IPC), announced the abolition of that court's responsibility system for wrongly decided cases, according to a November 21 newspaper article in The First. The system is described in the Implementation Details for the Beijing No. 1 IPC's Responsibility System for Illegally Adjudicated Cases (Trial)," which previously was used to discipline judges for cases overturned or altered on appeal.

Chi Qiang, President of the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court (IPC), announced the abolition of that court's responsibility system for wrongly decided cases, according to a November 21 newspaper article in The First. The system is described in the Implementation Details for the Beijing No. 1 IPC's Responsibility System for Illegally Adjudicated Cases (Trial)," which previously was used to discipline judges for cases overturned or altered on appeal. Court President Chi noted that the definition of a "wrongly decided case" is unclear in practice, and that the fear of sanctions harms the willingness of trial judges to decide cases independently. Chi said that his court will attempt to correct this problem by moving toward a disciplinary system that sanctions judges for illegal behavior rather than "incorrect" outcomes.

Many Chinese courts have adopted "responsibility systems for wrongly decided cases." Chen Youxi, Vice President of the Constitutional and Human Rights Committee of the All-China Lawyers Association (ACLA), noted that because such systems "have a direct impact on personal interests such as bonuses and benefits of those trial judges with high rates of overturned cases," trial judges "commonly resort to seeking advance guidance from higher courts before making a decision, and run to appeals courts to convince them not to overturn their verdicts," according to a December 7 Legal Daily article. Chen also notes that official use of reversal rates to measure judicial performance creates problems, because reversals often hinge on interpretations of conflicting or unclear law rather than illegal or unethical conduct. Both articles and the "Judicial System" section of the Commission's 2004 and 2005 Annual Reports note that such systems encourage judges to violate the principles of openness and transparency in judicial decisionmaking.

Reform of the Beijing No. 1 IPC's responsibility system is a positive step, and Court President Chi describes its goal as to reduce the administrative nature of court work. But ACLA's Chen notes that the practical effect of the decision is uncertain because the Supreme People's Court (SPC) supports the use of this type of responsibility system. Moreover, Chi suggests in other remarks that the Beijing court may actually be strengthening top-down systems used to manage judicial behavior. Chi also said that trial judges will be held responsible for the "quality" of their individual decisions, and must also participate in resolving any post-decision complaints raised by parties, according to a November 22 article appearing on the Ministry of Justice Web site. Similar SPC announcements appear to increase the responsibility of Chinese judges to respond to such petitions outside of ordinary appellate channels.