China Case Guidance (Issue 1, 2006; Issue 2, Total) (Criminal and Administrative Volume)

Author: Supreme People's Court, Supreme People's Procuratorate
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2006-02-01
Features: The mutual learning and complementarity between the two major legal systems—civil law and common law—are a trend of development. Civil law systems are gradually giving more importance to case law systems, while common law systems are increasingly valuing written law systems. How can China leverage the role of cases? Scholars are researching this issue, and judicial practice departments are also considering it. The publication of the China Case Guidance series will be an important step in the reform of the case guidance system, representing a significant achievement of judicial practice departments in addressing this issue. The joint publication of the China Case Guidance series by the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate is a concrete measure for the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate to guide the case handling work of courts and procuratorates at all levels across the country. The China Case Guidance series is a concrete measure for the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate to guide the case handling work of courts and procuratorates at all levels across the country, as well as an important attempt and achievement in the reform of the case guidance system. This series presents the following characteristics:
First, authority. The editorial committee is composed of leaders from the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and research articles are written by renowned scholars, ensuring high authority. Although these cases cannot serve as direct legal grounds for judgments, judges, procurators, and lawyers can cite them as reasons for judgments or arguments in court. For convenience of citation, the cases in this series are numbered for easy reference.
Second, novelty. The selected cases are final judgments from higher people's courts and the Supreme People's Court. Some of these cases involve new types of issues, some are difficult, and some are not covered by existing laws or are subject to differing interpretations. Publishing and studying these cases can guide similar cases to be judged equally.
Third, applicability. To help users understand the essence of the cases, each case in this series is accompanied by a research article written by a renowned scholar, explaining the theoretical principles of the judgment and summarizing its essence, abstracting case guidance principles, which serve as an important reference for legal practitioners and legal scholars.
Fourth, objectivity. The original documents such as the indictment, first-instance judgment, appeal, and second-instance judgment of the selected cases are published to allow readers to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the case and to enable them to make their own objective judgments. People have always been exploring the legal effect that cases should have—the de jure legal effect of cases—but we should take a different approach, placing greater emphasis on leveraging the practical reference role to enhance its de facto legal effect. If more people recognize and cite these cases, their practical effect will be greater. It is hoped that the publication of China Case Guidance will contribute to better leveraging the de facto legal effect of cases.
The mutual learning and complementarity between the two major legal systems—civil law and common law—are a trend of development. Civil law systems are gradually giving more importance to case law systems, while common law systems are increasingly valuing written law systems. How can China leverage the role of cases? Scholars are researching this issue, and judicial practice departments are also considering it. The publication of the China Case Guidance series will be an important step in the reform of the case guidance system, representing a significant achievement of judicial practice departments in addressing this issue. The joint publication of the China Case Guidance series by the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate is a concrete measure for the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate to guide the case handling work of courts and procuratorates at all levels across the country. The China Case Guidance series is a concrete measure for the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate to guide the case handling work of courts and procuratorates at all levels across the country, as well as an important attempt and achievement in the reform of the case guidance system. This series presents the following characteristics:
First, authority. The editorial committee is composed of leaders from the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and research articles are written by renowned scholars, ensuring high authority. Although these cases cannot serve as direct legal grounds for judgments, judges, procurators, and lawyers can cite them as reasons for judgments or arguments in court. For convenience of citation, the cases in this series are numbered for easy reference.
Second, novelty. The selected cases are final judgments from higher people's courts and the Supreme People's Court. Some of these cases involve new types of issues, some are difficult, and some are not covered by existing laws or are subject to differing interpretations. Publishing and studying these cases can guide similar cases to be judged equally.
Third, applicability. To help users understand the essence of the cases, each case in this series is accompanied by a research article written by a renowned scholar, explaining the theoretical principles of the judgment and summarizing its essence, abstracting case guidance principles, which serve as an important reference for legal practitioners and legal scholars.
Fourth, objectivity. The original documents such as the indictment, first-instance judgment, appeal, and second-instance judgment of the selected cases are published to allow readers to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the case and to enable them to make their own objective judgments. People have always been exploring the legal effect that cases should have—the de jure legal effect of cases—but we should take a different approach, placing greater emphasis on leveraging the practical reference role to enhance its de facto legal effect. If more people recognize and cite these cases, their practical effect will be greater. It is hoped that the publication of China Case Guidance will contribute to better leveraging the de facto legal effect of cases.