Abstract
The media has reported numerous miscarriages of justice in China, some of which directly result from errors in forensic evidence as a main cause. Given that such miscarriages occurred under the influence of China’s Strike Hard Policy, empirical studies on its impact on forensic evidence, par-ticularly that leading to miscarriages of justice will be conducted at multiple levels with diverse research methods. The old policy officially took effect mainly from 1983 to 2005, when problems in forensic evidence significantly produced more miscarriages of justice. The old policy’s impact on forensic evidence will be further explored based on data that were collected from experiments conducted with 394 questionnaires and 100 judges in four sample cities, just before and after the old policy was replaced with a balanced policy in late 2005. Surveys to elicit the traits of forensic identification were used, as well as the exogenous imposition of the old policy to identify its negative impacts on forensic evidence, combined with new policy effects. The 2005 reform towards balancing leniency and severity is essentially inadequate to prevent errors in forensic evidence.
Highlights
China’s Strike Hard Policy that officially began from 1983 and ended in 2005 was intended to bring “severe and swift” punishment to criminals during many waves of anti-crime campaigns in an attempt to strike down and control serious crimes in China (Trevaskes, 2008)
Findings were obtained from the survey in sample cities, the results are generalizable to other areas of Mainland China where the influence of the old policy still exists, even if the new policy has been implemented in recent eight years
Previous work suggests there was no much difference between the impact of the abandoned old policy and that of the new policy on forensic errors
Summary
China’s Strike Hard Policy that officially began from 1983 and ended in 2005 was intended to bring “severe and swift” punishment to criminals during many waves of anti-crime campaigns in an attempt to strike down and control serious crimes in China (Trevaskes, 2008). The old policy required all law-enforcement officials from the police, procuratorates and courts to closely work together in order to ensure imposing “severe and swift” punishment at the last defence line of justice. More attention to such punishment than justice, often comes with downsides concerning high expectations from the public and huge pressure from leaders, which attempted to meet the actual needs of so-called efficient anti-crime campaigns at the expense of criminal justice (Nestor, 2007). In addition to experimental results, survey questions revealed that further reforms are needed to correct forensic error that increases miscarriages of justice
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
