| A well-functioning judicial system plays a vital role in the healthy and sustainable development of a country's economy.For more than forty years of reform and opening up,China has made world-renowned achievements in the economic field and created the so-called "China miracle".A fact that coincides with the reforms in the economic field is that in recent decades,China has also made considerable progress in the construction of the rule of law.The improvement of the legal system and the advancement of the judicial system have provided a powerful guarantee for China's economic growth.Especially since the Fourth Plenary Session of the Eighteenth Central Committee of the PRC,China.has accelerated the pace of rule of.law construction and launched a series of significant judicial reform measures.These reforms are of vital importance to the improvement of the entire judicial system.However,regarding the operation of China's judicial system and the effectiveness of related reforms,previous studies have mostly focused on the field of law,mainly based on qualitative analyses and case studies,and investigation from an economic perspective is scarce.This article will use this as a starting point,using first-hand microdata,to address specific problems in the operation of China's judicial system,and related judicial system reformsform an economic perspective,and has reached a series of very meaningful conclusions.The three main topics involved in this article run through the entire process of judicial operation,including judicial decision and enforcement in China.Although China has made tremendous progress in the construction of the rule of law in recent years,it has to be acknowledged that there are still some problems in the operation of China's judicial system.In the field of judicial trials,one of the most prominent manifestations is the interference of administrative power in the judicial process.The off-site trial reform was launched as an effective measure to prevent administrative interference in the judiciary and weaken judicial local protectionism.According to the article,under the framework of the current judicial system,local governments have the ability to interfere with the court's judicial process,and jucicial localization has made the court's judgment on the case possess administrative level attributes.The off-site reform has two effects on the trial of first-instance:first,itcan curb administrative interference in justice,and thus change the outcome of first-instance trials;at the same time,the reform will also have a negative impact on judicial efficiency due to increased trial pressure brought by centralized jurisdiction.Taking into account the feasibility of the study,the article will take the off-site trial reform introduced by Jiangmen,Guangdong in December 2014 as an example to conduct research.In the field of judicial enforcement,there has always been the problem of "difficult enforcement" of courts judgments.The list of dishonest executed persons formally implemented in October 2013 is precisely to solve the problem of difficult implementation.The system will implement multi-sectoral joint punishment no those who are included-in the dishonest list.From the perspective of market punishment,the article conducts a study of the economic behavior of the listed executees,and believes that the inclusion will have a negative impact on the listed through two channels,namely the reputation mechanism and the information mechanism.The difficulty of this paper lies in the acquisition of data and the identification of causality.The required data must be constructed manually.The specific research content of each topic is as follows:First of all,I manually collected a total of 405 of all grass-roots courts in Jiangmen City and grass-roots courts in the "five surrounding districts and counties"from July 2011 to August 2016 and a total of 2,443 valid administrative case judgment documents from October 2014 to the end of 2015 in Beijing,by manually collecting on China Judgment Documents Network and Peking University Law.Two microdata sets were thus constructed.We then use the econometric method to empirically study the heterogeneous influence of the defendant's administrative level on the possibility of the plaintiff's win rates.The study found that in the case of "district and county-level"government units as defendants,the probability of the plaintiff winning is far lower than that of the "township-level" defendant and even lower than that of the "municipalitylevel" defendant,which not only confirms the existence of administrative interference in justice,is consistent with the theoretical explanation,but also reveals the channel of administrative interference in justice happens.In the second instance,however,the possibility of the plaintiff's winning in the "county-level" defendant's case is higher than that in the "township-level" defendant's case.This conclusion means that the second-instance judgment has the positive effect of correcting "judicial bias" in the first instance.Then,based on the data set as described above,the article uses the difference-indifferences model(DID)to empirically analyze whether the reform of Jiangmen City,Guangdong Province will improve the probability of a plaintiff's winning in an administrative case,and whether zit will reduce the trial efficiency of the case.The empirical research found that the off-site trials increased the possibility of the plaintiffs winning the first-trial administrative cases in Jiangmen City;moreover,the reform was more important in the possibility of the plaintiffs winning the first-trial administrative cases where the township government unit was the defendant.The impact on the administrative cases of the district and county-level defendants is relatively weak.This shows that the off-site trial reform has made Jiangmen's judicial system more independent,reduced local protectionism,and thus restrained the government' s power to a greater extent.The article also found that the reform of the judicial system of offsite trials in Jiangmen City will delay the entire judicial process from the plaintiff's prosecution to the court's trial by prolonging the "time from court acceptance to the(first)trial",thus reducing the efficiency of administrative cases.This implies that the reform of Jiangmen's judicial system has not only achieved its original goal,but also inevitably brought certain costs.In the end,the artical retrieves the dishonesty records of Chinese listed companies by retrieving the execution dishonesty records of all A-share listed companies from October 2013 to September 2016,and then the stock price,financial and performance data were matched to obtain the corresponding micro-data set.Then,the short-term and long-term effects of being included in the list of dishonest performers on listed companies were tested using the event study method and the difference-in-differences estimation.The study found that the incident of being included in the dishonest list reduced the company's cumulative abnormal return during the event window period,which is its short-term impact;the article also found that the listed companies listed on the dishonesty list have a significant decline in the subsequent revenue growth rate,but their proportion of total assets to loans has increased,which is its long-term impact.The above-mentioned basic findings indicate that the system of the list of persons subject to dishonesty is effective to a certain extent,and it has used the power of the market to punish certain companies that fail to be trusted.The research not only enriched the literature in the area of law and economics,but also deepened people's understanding of China's judicial operation process and the pros and cons of related judicial reforms,and provided theoretical support for corresponding and subsequent judicial reforms. |
PDF Full Text Request