Why People's Jury "Join But Not Judge"

The"join but not judge"phenomenon has a long history. Though people have different opinions upon this, finally they point at people's jury system. But the former research were usually limited to the comparison of foreign similar system, or the history development after the foundation of PRC, without systematically analyzing the production, development and change of people's jury system in China. This thesis tries to dissect the jury system with Chinese characteristics by tracing to its source, and investigate the possible direction of people's jury system by connecting to its current situation. The thesis can be divided into five parts:Introduction: explain the historical change of jury home and abroad, the research idea based on the development history of people's jury in our country, and the scheme of writing this paper: discussing from the three aspects of our country's jury system—past, present and future.Section one: Put forward the main problems discussed in this paper from the"join but not judge"phenomenon. In this section, first clarify and summarizes the"join but not judge"phenomenon, also reveal the problem. It's very common for jurors speak little or even do not speak in the trial, and the most important point is that in our country's collegial panel, jurors'attitudes are usually paid little attention or even ignored directly. Then make deep analysis of academic discussions and point out the questions need to be reconsidered: whether the people juror and the judge should have the same rights, and if the same, whether the juror should have the same qualities as the judge; why we don't have a case that people's jury has great influence during the trial, and what condition need to be created for this kind of case; the discussion are often limited to the institutional level, with little or no touch upon the thoughts of the people behind involved in the trial.Section two: make a thorough research of the development history and current situation of people's jury system, and investigate the production and develop characteristics. Demonstrate that people's jury system was first produced not for judicial democracy purpose, but for prevention of cruel political struggle expansion. The later development process always followed"the mass line", but this guiding ideology made the trial process fall into a dilemma of choosing between the law principle and people's attitudes. Then analyze the current situation: theorists mainly think that heavy political influence, adverse actual operation, people juror's confusion and ineffectiveness, and debate to reserve or abrogate it. Practitioners made some exploration of effective operation, mainly NPC members as people jurors. Finally illustrate the author's analysis of theorists'discussion and practitioners'exploration, propose the idea about people's jury system principle and its own characteristics, NPC members as people jurors.Section three: Based on the previous analysis, propose my own perfectible assumption. First of all propose the opinion about the characteristics of jury: the investitive jurisdiction of jurors was not only a kind of right but a kind of responsibility; the start of jury should be decided by the litigants not the judge. And then theoretically analyze and criticize how to deal with people's ideas: try to reduce the blindness of people's ideas, improve people's understanding of existing laws, lead people's ideas follow the law principles. At last, make some assumption about the start of jury, its scope, fund together with the selection of jurors and their rights and responsibilities, in order to perfect the existing system and give full play to the role of public participation in judgment.Conclusion: from cultural aspects of the law, make some prospects about the development of people's jury in our country: the legal culture is not static, and people will make adjustments to follow the change of times, finally prompt the legal culture change and develop.