Chinese Law and Politics Blog

Chinese State Council White Papers and the "Turn Against Law”

In recent years, Chinese central authorities have turned against a range of legal reforms that they had pursued in the late 20^th century. They have de-emphasized judicial professionalization.  They have increased the harassment and abuse of public interest lawyers.  And since 2006, Party authorities have pursued “Socialist Rule of Law” political campaigns re-emphasizing Party supremacy and warning against the infiltration of “Western” rule-of-law concepts.   (For more on this, see here.)

Official Chinese rhetoric with regard to legal reform has also changed.  Comparing two State Council White Papers - China’s Efforts and Achievements in Promoting the Rule of Law (2008) and the Socialist Legal System With Chinese Characteristics (2011) illustrates this shift.

Roadblocks to Filing a Case: Target Ratios in Chinese Courts

Interesting article from the Southern Weekend a few weeks back on the well-known phenomena of Chinese courts refusing to accept cases toward the end of the calendar year.

The underlying dynamics are relatively simple.  Chinese courts and judges are graded annually by their superiors on a number of targets, including reversed case ratios, numbers of cases successfully mediated, and the like.  One such target: closed case ratios – numbers of cases closed out in a particular calendar year, compared with the numbers of cases filed.  The higher the ratio, the better for the court and its judges in terms of salary bonuses and career promotions.  For precisely this reason, Chinese court presidents fall over themselves every year to announce that they have achieved 95, 99, or 100% closed case ratios.

Of course, the reality is much more complex.  Given time constraints, courts are much less likely to be able to resolve those cases that are filed towards the end of the year.  Absent any corrective measures, this will drag down court statistics and negatively affect salaries and careers. 

So how to resolve this?  Stop accepting cases.  Block parties from filing, particularly towards the end of the year.

Are Chinese Authorities Seeking to Rein in the Courts?

Chinese authorities may be rethinking their willingness to allow the courts to serve as forums for challenges to existing Party and government controls.  Over the last year, Chinese authorities have launched the “Three Supremes” campaign, re-emphasizing Party control as a key principle that should guide the work of Chinese courts, instead of merely relying on the written law. 

The “Three Supremes” campaign coincides with personnel changes within the courts that suggest a less friendly environment for legal activists trying to use the court system to pursue their claims.  In March, Wang Shengjun assumed the role as president of the Supreme People’s Court, and has since played a leading role in promoting the “Three Supremes” campaign.  Unlike his predecessor, Wang’s background is deeply rooted in the Party’s political-legal apparatus and the public security forces, rather than in the courts or other legal institutions. 

The “Three Supremes” campaign also occurs at the same time as Chinese officials appear to be less comfortable with relying on court adjudication as a means to resolve citizen grievances.  In recent years, Chinese authorities have pushed to channel administrative and civil cases involving hotly disputed issues or large numbers of plaintiffs out of the court system and into mediation.  Chinese officials have also taken steps to curtail the use of such forums by Chinese lawyers and legal activists, including restricting their involvement in such cases.

Has Citizen Activism Led to Increased Numbers of Chinese Court Cases?

Actually, no. There have been several references recently to the "skyrocketing" or "rapidly increasing" caseload of Chinese courts as a result of increased citizen legal activism. But the numbers just don't support this.

True, the annual work reports of the Supreme People's Court over the last ten years do seem to reveal a substantial increase in the total number of Chinese court "cases" since the mid-1990s. But careful analysis of the numbers reveals that this is actually an artifact of what judicial authorities are counting as a "case." Numbers of civil cases (citizens suing each other) and administrative cases (citizens suing the state) have remained relatively stable, or even declined, compared to levels reached in the 1990s.

Chinese Judiciary Seeks to Divert Administrative Cases Out of Litigation

Chinese judicial authorities are making a major push to increase the use of alternative methods to resolve administrative litigation cases. In part, this is an effort to improve mechanisms for resolving citizen grievances. But it is also specifically aimed at channeling cases involving sensitive issues affecting large numbers of aggrieved plaintiffs, such as land seizures, out of the courtroom.

Analysis: Henan Circular on Peaceful Construction

The Henan Provincial Party Committee and Government jointly issued a circular on April 26, 2006 that calls on provincial authorities to strengthen their controls over society and address a range of social problems during the period 2006 to 2010 as a means towards conducting "peaceful construction," establishing a "harmonious society," "improv[ing] the Party's ruling capacity," and "solidif[ying] the Party's position in power." Specific goals listed in the circular overlap with in the Opinion on Promoting the Construction of a New Socialist Countryside, issued by the Communist Party Central Committee (CPCC) and the State Council (SC) on December 31, 2005, and an earlier opinion issued by the general offices of the CPCC and the SC.

Translation: Henan Circular on Peaceful Construction

The following is a rough translation of the Henan Provincial Party Committee and Provincial Government Circular Regarding the Issuance of the "Program for Construction of a Peaceful Henan," issued  April 26, 2006.  (Translation done by Tom Stutsman)

SPC Considering Judicial Interpretation to Address Discrepancy in Death Compensation Awards for Urban and Rural Hukou Holders

The Supreme People's Court (SPC) is considering issuing a judicial interpretation to address discrepencies between rural and urban hukou holders in death compensation awards, according to comments made by March 14 by SPC President Xiao Yang and carried in a March 14 Xinhua post.

In 2006, Chinese media reported multiple cases in which long-term migrants living in Chinese urban areas (but still holding rural hukou registration) who were killed in traffic accidents received significantly less compensation than corresponding urban hukou holders killed in similar (or the same) accident.  See these posts (1, 2, 3) on the website of the Congressional-Executive Commission of China. The discrepency is a result of a 2003 SPC interpretation which links death awards to urban and rural hukou status, regardless of how long the deceased has actually been living in a given urban area.

It is unclear if or when the SPC will issue a judicial interpretation on the subject, or what the content might be.  Xiao Yang noted that experts consulted by SPC officials during the fall of 2006 regarding possible revisions were of different minds of how to address the subject.  But he asserted that the SPC has already reached preliminary consensus on the content.

Supreme People's Court Emphasizes Need For Mediation

The Supreme People's Court issued an opinion on March 7 directing courts to strengthen their use of mediation in handling citizen grievances as a means to reduce social conflict.  The Opinion on Further Increasing the Positive Role of Mediation (in Litigation) in Constructing Socialism and a Harmonious Society instructs courts to increase training for judges in the use of mediation, establish systems of rewards that encourage judges to resort to mediation, and to include success in using mediation ín the regular career assessments of judges.

Judicial System

Test