＂Democratization＂ of judicial interpretation and the Supreme Court＇s political function

The new provisions on judicial interpretation work issued by the Supreme People＇s Court （SPC） explicitly establish two procedural institutions： ＂Citizen motion for project initiation of judicial interpretation＂ and ＂Seeking public comment.＂ Under the rubric of democratization, these create ＂primafacie democratic legitimacy＂ for it to carry out the political function of developing law through judicial interpretation, and also enable it to broadly absorb information or knowledge in the course of Chinese-style judicial interpretation, especially abstract interpretation. However, the ＂democratization＂ trend gives also the impression that the SPC hews so close to public opinion that it will find itself in a quandary if it becomes necessary for it to make an independent and wise judgment. The SPC must find an appropriate balance between following behind and standing aloof from public opinion. Therefore, we should not take any further steps in ＂democratization.＂ An acceptable strategy for the present would be for the SPC to retain abstract interpretation in a limited sphere while working on reforming the content, form and system of concrete interpretation and extending its scope of application, letting the two models of judicial interpretation coexist and compete for future development and choices.

Report on the Work of the Supreme People's Court 2016(Extract)

Review of Work in 2015In 2015,the SPC,under the strong leadership of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China(CPC)with Comrade Xi Jinping as General Secretary,and under the effective supervision of the National People’s Congress(NPC)and its standing committee,profoundly studied and carried out the spirits of the 18th National Congress of the CPC,and the third,fourth and fifth plenary meetings of the 18th CPC

Human Rights Protection Under China's Judicial System——An Interview with Xiao Yang, President of the Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China

Question: As you know. attention is now growing in China and outside to judicial protection of human rights. As President of the Supreme People’s Court and China’s top judge, would you make some comments on protection of human rights under China’s juridical system?

THE ORIGIN AND TRANSFORMATION OF JUDICIAL YUAN： FROM THE COMPARATIVE AND HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

The Judicial Yuan, a model of supreme judicial organization peculiar to China＇s recent history, was one of the outcomes of several decades of evolution from the legal reform in the late Qing dynasty to the passage of Constitution of the Republic of China （ROC） in 1947. Its predecessor, the Dali Yuan established in 1906 by the Qing government, not only had the supreme judicial power and the power of abstract interpretation, but also enjoyed the power of interior administration independently from the outset. The Judicial Yuan, established in 1928, inherited the judicial administrative power of Dali Yuan and further expanded it. The Judicial Yuan also inherited Dali Yuan＇s power to unify the interpretation of law and regulations, and expanded the power of abstract normal control （Normenkontrolle） to constitutional interpretation. The Council of the Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan had developed the paradigm of constitutional court and shared similarities with the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany. It is safe to conclude that even before the promulgation of the Constitution of the ROC, the Judicial Yuan was fairly well-developed in institutional terms. The key characters of the ROC Judicial Yuan include the special arrangement of judicial administration, a centralized judicial review by the Council of the Grand Justices and a diverse judicial trial mode.