Shenzhen Star TV:

We have noticed that the Decisions particularly emphasized that we should carry out major reforms based on law. At the same time, it required our legislative procedures to answer the demands of reform as well as those of economic and social development. Would you please tell us how to legislation and reform are connected, and which of these plays the greater role? Thanks.

Jiang Wei:

The Decisions put more emphasis on the reform of governance according to law. But we should be especially conscious of the fact that reform, including reform of the judicial system, should first uphold the authority of the Constitution and laws, because the purpose of judicial reform is to implement the Constitution and laws consistently and accurately. Reforms which violate the authority of legal governance should be fully prohibited. The Decisions actually names the following requirements concerning reform supported by the Constitution and the law:

First, we need to consolidate top-level reform, and organically coordinate it with the improvement of the legislative policy-making process, which means that reforms should be planned simultaneously with the study of legal provisions which need to be amended. Second, any changes to legal provisions should only be carried out following the enactment of amended laws. We cannot violate the law and its authority in the name of reform. Third, those reforms which demand changes to existing laws but which require a trial period to improve our understanding because current conditions are not mature enough to support the change, they should be initiated and tested with the accreditation of the legislative body according to certain legal procedures. This is exemplified by the pilot arbitration procedure of criminal cases in a number of cities mandated by the Standing Committee of National People's Congress this year. Fourth, local governments are encouraged to spearhead the reforms that do not involve modifying and reforming the law, such as reforming their working process, as long as these reforms operate within the legal framework. Those are the points I would like to highlight regarding the relationship between reform and governance according to the law.

Oriental Star TV:

In the past few years, we have seen lots of people who have preferred to go through the administrative petition system rather than go through the courts to protect their rights. What's your opinion on this preference and how to change the situation to rebuild the credibility of our judicial system? Thanks.

Jiang Wei:

There are multiple reasons for this problem, one of which is the unsatisfied credibility of the judicial system and another of which is the irrationality of the processes that allow judicial power to function. The Decisions made by the third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee resolved to direct the people involved in administrative petition procedures to resolve legal disputes and lawsuits to resolve their problems using legal procedures and the judicial framework instead. Some departments have already started to do this. Looking at current practice, there are three problematic procedures which cause people to prefer administrative petitions over legal prosecution:

The first is access to judicial procedures -- how should people get access to the courts to have their problems mediated in the judicial system and their lawsuits heard? The major reform proposed by the 4th Plenary Session changes the case-filing review system to a registration system, requiring the courts to register and hear every lawsuit and prosecution that should be brought to trial in accordance with the law.

The second problem is the issue of legal rulings which are not carried out. It has been observed that some legal disputes or problems remain unsolved despite the completion of legal procedures. The next phase of legal reform focuses on these unenforced rulings so that the appeals of the people can be heard and solved according to legal procedures.

The third issue relates to upholding the credibility of judicial power. We need to uphold judicial power and follow judicial decisions when the lawsuits have been heard and verdicts have been made justly. But we need also to consider that some people may have difficulties and provide them with judicial assistance. Thanks.

China News Service:

Chinese judicial officials sometimes face external interventions in the course of their work. I want to know, does the Decisions contains any requirements and measures to avoid such actions? Thank you.

Jiang Wei:

The power of the judiciary is founded upon the neutral status of the courts. Any illegal intervention that leads to an unjust judgment reduces the credibility of the country's judiciary. To avoid judicial activities being affected by the intervention of human factors, the Decisions adopted at the recently concluded Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee requires: first, that a system to record, notify and punish those officials who have intervened in the judiciary be set up; second, that a system to record the process involved in each case be established in order to avoid cases being intervened in by other unconcerned judicial officials; third, that illegal actions such as private contact between members of the judiciary and lawyers or parties involved in cases before the judiciary, divulging or making inquiries about the case will be strictly forbidden. In addition, the Decisions also calls for a protection mechanism to protect judicial officials from transfer, demotion, discharge, or removal without legal grounds or without going through legal procedures. All those requirements will guarantee Chinese judges and procurators will strictly maintain the justice of the country's judiciary and deal with the cases impartially.

Thank you for coming to today's conference, we are looking forward to your continued attention and support to China's legal construction. Thank you all.

Hu Kaihong:

This ends today's press conference. Thank you Mr. Jiang, thank you all!