On 23 December 2009, the Supreme People’s Court passed two sets of regulations aimed at increasing the transparency and openness of China’s court system. Both sets of regulations became effective on the same date.
The Certain Regulations on the Acceptance of Media Scrutiny by the People’s Courts contain guidance on how the courts should handle the media, and what information should be provided to them.
The Six Regulations on Judicial Openness set out rules of conduct which courts must adhere to during and in relation to a hearing, from the beginning to the end.
At the start of a case, relevant information must be made available both to the parties concerned and to the public. Examples of this include information about the conditions that must be met, procedures that must be followed and documentation that must be provided in order to make a case. Information must also be provided about the rights and obligations of the parties, the format of court documents and court fees and ways to reduce or eliminate such fees (Regulation 1).
Appropriate arrangements should be made for people to attend the hearing. All evidence should be heard in open court. Whether or not a case was heard in open court, the judgment should be read in open court or be made publicly available through other means (Regulation 2).
Information about the execution of judgments should be made available to the parties concerned, and to the public (Regulation 3).
Certain types of evidence must be heard in open court (Regulation 4).
All judgments may be made public on the internet, except for cases involving state secrets or personal privacy, or crimes committed by minors. However, if the parties involved object to the publication of this information and have legitimate reasons for doing so, the court may decide not to make it public, or may do so but with the necessary adjustments. Judgments are to fully reflect the arguments of the parties, the evidence made available, determination of the facts, and the relevant legal conclusions (Regulation 5).
The way in which courts handle cases, and other related administration procedures, is to be made public. People’s Courts at all levels are to gradually establish and improve their websites and other information platforms (Regulation 6).
Although in civil law jurisdictions such as China, court cases do not have the potential to make law as they do in common law systems, legal practitioners in China are clearly keen for more case-related information. According to Dr Che Hu, editorial director of Westlaw China, “people don’t know how the law is interpreted in the courts”. But Che believes the trend towards greater openness is clear. “The courts are going to make cases available, and cases are now having more reasoning written into them compared to a couple of years ago,” he says. Westlaw China operates a legal database which currently includes summaries of 200,000 Chinese court cases.
Some observers see these new regulations as part of a long-term trend towards increased openness in the judicial system, and give it a guarded welcome. Sam Li, senior partner at Jincheng Tongda & Neal in Beijing, views the regulations on judicial openness as a “step in the right direction”, but cautions that we need to wait and see how much impact it will have.
Dr Liu Nanping, founding partner of Liu & Wang Attorneys At Law and former associate professor of law at the University of Hong Kong, commented: “It appears that the Supreme People’s Court attempts to make some important moves on transparency or openness against corruption, but we lawyers wonder: how could the judiciary be a piece of isolated and clean land?”
