Research On Performance Evaluation Of The Prosecutor

Scientific evaluation system is the essential part in the prosecution institution management system. In accordance with the some evaluation rules, procedures and criteria, scientific evaluation on prosecutor's attitude, behavior, efficiency and effectiveness is no doubt an important part in the prosecution institution management system. Implementation of the scientific, standardized, orderly, efficient and quality as the main content of the performance evaluation of prosecutor (PEP) not only plays a functional role of the prosecutor, upholds the unified and correct implementation of law and safeguards social equity and justice, but also strengthens the management of prosecutor team, promotes the necessary professional requirements of the prosecutor. The author carried out research and analysis on the performance evaluation of prosecutor from three parts.First, a re-evaluation on the concept of the PEP, characteristics and principles should be analyzed and defined. PEP has its own connotation, extension and professional rules. The prosecutor's performance reflects the relations between the duties fulfilled for the organization's goals and the actual results achieved. PEP should include three elements, namely: behavior, efficiency, effectiveness. PEP has distinct occupational characteristics which are strict normative, strict procedural, factual objective, scientific systematic and complex diversified. Prosecutor professional attributions and the power operating rules determine that PEP must be different from civil service examination of other state authorities.Second, PEP model copied and followed from administrative authorities completely deviates from prosecutor's judicial attributions and prosecutorial power operating rules. In practice, it reveals the obvious problems and shortcomings mainly including: unclear role of PEP, unspecific contents, imperfect procedures and unscientific use of evaluation results. There are five main factors which affect the performance of the prosecutor. First of all, the system"following under the dual upper order"leads that the local party committees and people's congress system unduly interfere the work of prosecution institution; second, the leader system of prosecution integration and administrative management mode ignore the prosecutor's professional characteristics causing that PEP can not be connected directly to the job promotion, wages, bonuses and other benefits, then eliminate the prosecutor's career enterprising spirit; third, "duty- based" instead of "rights-based" executive management in traditional culture makes the prosecutor lack independence and the value of the identity; fourth, unscientific evaluation indicators and tools with lots of flaws make prosecutors at a loss and difficult to produce good performance; fifth, the lack of prosecutors individual ability and professional ethics seriously affect the formation of prosecutor performance.Third, the PEP must reflect the characteristics of prosecutor profession and power operating rules. We should fully understand the specificity of prosecutor group formation and differences in the different departments and positions and correctly handle the relationship between generality and individuality. According to the professional requirements, we should established scientific vision goals and indicators of the PEP, rationally design evaluation process and correctly apply the PEP results in order to mobilize the enthusiasm, initiative and creativity of prosecutors, enhanced the sense of responsibility and mission, improve the quality and efficiency and effectively play its due role in upholding the unified and correct implementation of law and safeguarding social equity and justice.