Inefficient Institutional Trial Origin

This essay , starting with the clear-up movement of long-pending cases carried out by the Supreme Court from the year of 2003,draws public attention to the judicial mechanism movement, including the assessment of the movement's effect, and the analysis of the cause of the effect ; the exploration of the institutional cause of the pending case , and suggests some implemental measures as well.This essay is generally divided into four parts.The first part points out that with the development of economy, promoting the judicial efficiency has become a common topic among the developed countries and the developing- countries under the transformation to market-based economy, and an urgent unsolved problem which affects national economy and the people's livelihood, and, in the perspective of time period of trial -a quite quantifiable factor, elaborates the realistic meaning of how efficiency becomes one of the principles in court works. It also gives a definition of the long-pending case, that is, the unsettled cases that surpass the legal trial period ,and explain the reason of taking civil case as objective object.The second part mainly reveals the negative effect on the time period of adjudication by the national judicial institution. Compared to some foreign counties that have had the general rules of the operation way of the case adjudication, national judicial operation constantly set obstacles to the rocess of the case adjudication by institutional or non-institutional factors, from which this essay unveiled the main courses of the difficulties to promote the judicial efficiency as followings: 1) the low quality of the national judicial personnel in terms of profession and moral. 2) the cumbersome and jumbled judicial structure on account of the current personnel organization. 3) the numerous structure inside the court makes the case circulate in an administrative examining way .4) the judgment in the cooperative discussion system is too simple and arbitrary, and the judge is probably interfered by some factors , such as nepotism, power influence , money influence etc. during the judgment activity.The third part points out that the clear-up of the long-pending case will not be rooted out completely but only reach certain phased victory, because ,on one hand , no action was taken against those who should be responsible for that.; on the other hand , the court, on the edge of the national power system , is the object of the judicial reform rather than the subject of it, which greatly relies on the outer resources. It is impossible to eliminate the pending case only by the reform and reorganization of the inner structure.The fourth part primarily discusses the implemental measures to make national judicature out of the difficult position. Firstly, we can not copy the way of operation in some European countries to promote the judicial efficiency, because they do not confront the problems , say, the low quality of judge and the lack of judicial independence etc. as our country does; secondly , the combat of corruption , the promotion of judicial efficiency and the judicial reform should be carried out under party's leadership ; lastly , although it probably not easy to step forwards too much in this field , however, we can make some useful attempts such as making public the time of case operation , and increasing the degree of openness of adjudication.; willingly under public supervision , imposing pressure by ourselves and continuing carrying out the pilot project in the reform of judicature to win attention and support from the public.