From trial to jail, it takes just 3 months in China

Gavel in judge's hand is itself a deterrent against wrongdoing


In China it takes a maximum of three months for getting an accused tried for an offence, convicted and sent to jail. Civil or commercial disputes are either settled or decided within six months.
The entire judiciary, from the lower court to the highest court, is well connected through a computer network with each judge having every information in front of him/her. The court hall looks like a corporate office with state-of-the-art technology put in place in its day-to-day functioning. A mere look at the court hall gives an impression that the gavel in the judge's hand will act as a deterrent against wrongdoing.
The case management system with well-knit archives is so scientific that every information is displayed on the screen for the benefit of litigants and judges, the moment a case is taken up for hearing.
In a criminal case, information on the accused, including the thumb impression, weapons seized from the scene of occurrence, and witness depositions and statements can be obtained on the computer screen during the hearing/trial for ready reference by defence counsel, the prosecution and the judge.

This is what a delegation of the International Council of Jurists (ICJ) came to know from Justice Jing Hanchao, vice-president of the Supreme People's Court of China (SPCC), during a visit there.
The delegation, led by Justice V.S. Sirpurkar of the Supreme Court and including ICJ president Adish Aggarwala; Director S. Prabhakaran, Mizoram MP C.L. Ruala, advocate L.D. Rajendra Prasad, got first-hand information on the functioning of the Chinese judicial system. Members M. Antony Selvaraj and Yatin Reddy; Justice Ali Hameed Mohamed of the Supreme Court of Maldives; and Justice P.R. Walagama of the High Court of Colombo, Sri Lanka, were present.
The crime rate is very low in China with criminal cases accounting for only six per cent of the total. With China's economic and trade relations with other countries growing by leaps and bounds, civil or commercial cases account for 68 per cent. As a result, it has been mandated in the civil procedural law that every attempt be made by the court for settling a commercial dispute through mediation/arbitration by a committee of mediators. The mediators' report is final and the court incorporates it as a final decree for acceptance by both parties.

Justice Jing said 10 million cases were being handled by the various courts in China, the SPCC alone accounting for about 10,000 cases. Once final arguments started, the case would be completed in a day or two. In certain important cases, arguments could stretch for about 10 days. The written judgments would be not more than four-five pages and the final decision would be incorporated in one page. Asked whether the SPCC came across corruption cases against civil servants, Justice Jing said “not many,” “only very few cases,” and they would be decided within three months.
Justice Sirpurkar lauded the mediation system in China and suggested frequent exchange programmes which would enable Indian mediators to understand the Chinese model and vice versa. When Mr. Aggarwala invited a Chinese team to visit India in the context of growing economic and trade relations, Justice Jing said he had visited the country in 2007 and expressed a desire to come to India again, as it would help in a better understanding of the Indian legal system.
Mr. Prabhakaran felt that the stringent mechanism for implementation of court orders was worthy of emulation in India, where more often than not orders were breached with impunity, necessitating the courts invoking contempt provisions.

Earlier, the delegation visited the Beijing High People's Court and interacted with Justice Herong, vice-president, HPC, and other judges. It also exchanged ideas with All-China Lawyers Association president Yu Ning.