Abstract

A plea bargaining system was introduced into Chinese Criminal Procedure Law in 2018 and became a basic principle of Chinese Criminal Procedure. This plea bargaining system embodies characteristics of both adversary and inquisitorial models. Chinese prosecutors are granted with a leading role in this plea bargaining system, as in the U.S., and can decide which cases are suitable for plea bargaining, which type of process can be applied, and give recommendations as to the sentencing, which judges shall in principle follow. To transplant such an arrangement from the U.S. model into an inquisitorial system, however, causes various problems. Fairness and justice cannot be entirely guaranteed under the wide-ranging practice of plea bargaining; the function of trials is derogated and undermined; and the decision-making process on core issues is moved forwards to the pre-trial period. Moreover, the procedural rights of defendants are more at risk when prosecutors dominate plea bargaining without any supervision from outside. With a brief introduction of an inquisitorial model based on the German plea bargaining system, the role of Chinese prosecutors in plea bargaining is urged to be reconsidered and their authority should be restricted in order to ensure that judges are guaranteed the judicial power to make final decisions.

Highlights

  • Chinese prosecutors are granted with a leading role in this plea bargaining system, as in the U.S, and can decide which cases are suitable for plea bargaining, which type of process can be applied, and give recommendations as to the sentencing, which judges shall in principle follow

  • With a brief introduction of an inquisitorial model based on the German plea bargaining system, the role of Chinese prosecutors in plea bargaining is urged to be reconsidered and their authority should be restricted in order to ensure that judges are guaranteed the judicial power to make final decisions

  • The Chinese plea bargaining system has contributed to the improvement of judicial efficiency since its introduction in 2018

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In the first half of 2020, 82.2% of cases were solved through plea bargaining (Shi, 2020b) These statistics demonstrate that the Chinese plea bargaining system is becoming a common practice and is improving the efficiency of criminal proceedings. The current discussions on the role of Chinese prosecutors mainly focus on the content of sentencing recommendation and its effect on judges (such as Li, 2020; Bian & Li, 2021; Zhu, 2021; Li, 2021; Xiao & Gong, 2021; Sun, 2021). It is time to consider the disadvantages and risk of the current arrangement for Chinese prosecutors in a plea bargaining system which is a mixture of German and U.S system

The Leading Role of Chinese Prosecutors in Plea Bargaining
Problems with the Prosecutors’ Leading Role in Plea Bargaining
Conflicts between Fairness and Efficiency
The Undermining of the Trial Process
The Procedural Rights of Defendants at Risks
The Leading Role of Judges in Plea Bargaining
German Prosecutors as Safeguards of Plea Bargaining
German Prosecutors’ Participation in Plea Bargaining—Empirical Report
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call