Rearsch On The Acceptability Of The Criminal Decision

The acceptability of decision means the nature of decision to be accepted by not rejected by the public. But the concept of the term itself is not what this paper going to deal with. What this paper concerns is that since acceptability of decision is a value judgment basing on the cross activity between decision and receiver of it, it is therefore a subjective issue as for the acceptability of criminal decision which is hard to define a clear and prevailing standard for acceptability. What the paper addresses is not an answer to what kind of criminal decisions are acceptable, but specific factors that influence the acceptability of criminal decisions, and the existence and strength of which make receivers of criminal decisions make their own value judgment of the acceptability of the decisions.In the author's view, the acceptability of criminal decision is a value judgment of the receiver of the decision, which depends on the receivers but not the decision itself, therefore no answer will be found in the nature of decision itself. In addition, simple statistic analysis can not bring convincing conclusion due to the complexity and different interests of the receivers. Only through analyzing the factors that affect receiver's judgment of decisions can we find a way to solve the problem.According to the author, the factors that affect the acceptability of decisions are as follows:1.To what extent did the subjective factors of the judge affect the decisions during the process of the decision to be made? It maily including two questions as follows: the authority of the judge to interpret law and the judicial discretion rigut.2. Expectation of the receivers, which is formed basing on the recognization and understanding of substantive law. The major reasons that cause the discrepancy between expectation of receivers and actual effects in judicial practice are: (1) the existence of judicial discretion; (2) the vagueness of rules of substantive law;3. Judicial environment for decision making, the components of which involves procedural justice issues;4. Whether the relevant rights of the receivers are protected, mainly the participation right in procedural justice which is not an issue of judicial environment;5. Whether the decision itself is convincing.The author then reviews the above factors from theoretical and realistic aspects and finds that there are defects in both theory and practice, which influence the recognition of the receivers of the acceptability of decisions. The author therefore proposes some reform and counting measures.The whole paper is composed of three parts, eight chapters. Chapter one, as part one, analyzes some basic questions concerning the acceptability of criminal decisions. Chapters two to chapter four constitute part two, which analyzes the factors that influence acceptability of criminal decisions. Chapter two reviews the expectation of criminal decision and analyzes that due to judicial interpretation and judicial discretion; there will be discrepancy between the expectation of the receivers and actual effects of decisions. Chapter three deals with theoretical analysis, mainly on judicial discretion and several uncertain factors in the formation of criminal decision. Chapter four demonstrates the negative influence of problems existing criminal judicial practices like judicial corruption, private remedy, media's influence on justice, false and wrong cases on the acceptability of criminal decisions to point out that a lot work need to be done to improve the acceptability of criminal decisions under the present judicial environment. Chapter five to chapter eight constitute part three. Basing on the analysis of factors influencing acceptability of criminal decision, this part proposes countermeasures to enhance and improve acceptability of criminal decision. Chapter five deals with countermeasures in the substantive law level and reform suggestions are made concerning clarifying substantive law, strictness of judicial interpretation and regulation on exertion of discretion. Chapter six deals with countermeasures in the substantive law level. It proposes procedural countermeasures to promote acceptability of criminal decision. Chapter seven deals with countermeasures in the system level. It points out that there are some unreasonable factors that interfere with judicial independency, problems with the constitution of judge team, conflict between public opinion and judicial independence through analysis of the present criminal procedure mechanism. Chapter eight deals with countermeasures in the form level. Through analysis of the form of criminal decision, criminal decision writ, the author points out that reasoning in decision is of realistic importance of promoting the acceptability of criminal decisions.