Southern Weekend, 2009-07-08
As part of a broader effort to formulate detailed sentencing guidelines and improve sentencing consistency, 120 courts throughout China are currently experimenting with “sentencing arguments” in which prosecutors and defense lawyers engage in oral exchanges at the end of the trial over how the court should sentence the defendant. According to Beijing University professor Chen Ruihua, because 99% of all trials end in conviction, “the central issue during trials that prosecutors and defendants alike are most concerned about is sentencing, not conviction.” Trying to separate conviction and sentencing procedures is difficult in China, explains Jiang Huiling of the Supreme People's Court's Judicial Reform Office, due to the civil law's tradition of combining the two. But making sentencing procedures more open and transparent is essential to combating judicial corruption, argue advocates of reform. In cases where defendant's plead not guilty, Professor Chen suggests implementing a two phase trial system so defense lawyers are not forced to argue for lenient sentences immediately after trying to convince the court of their client's innocence. Ultimately, though, suggests the article's author, the greatest problem sentencing procedure reform faces is the deciding power of adjudication committees in important cases.
No comments:
Post a Comment