Law On The Jury System

Jury system is a judicial system that a group of laymen and professional judges try cases.Modern Jury System originated from Great Britain is mainly divided into July System and Assessor System. People Assessor System of China is similar to Assessor System in term of source and formation, though it came in imitation of that of the former Soviet Union.Jury System, mainly adopted by countries of common law, initiated from the 11th Century's Britain and preliminarily consummated by the 13th Century. Typified the system, Jury System of the U.S. comprises the Great Jury and the Petty Jury, the responsibilities of the former, mainly in hearing from prosecutors and deciding whether to bring on indictment, while the latter's in passive hearing.That of France typifies the Assessor System, mainly adopted by countries of continental law. French Assessor System is the result coming from the reform of the transplanted July System of Great Britain. Assessor, under this system, participate in trying felonies and render a verdict on case facts and the application of law, jointly with professional judges.Established as a part of the legal system, the system in western countries need to be cautiously studied and correctly recognized with the employment of the value analysis method. In writer's view, the western system values itself in respect of Democracy, Justice, Liberty and Rationality.In accordance with the democratic criteria advocated by Dahl, a noted democratic-theorist, the System is characterized with distinct democratic values, which also shows its significance in terms of political democracy. This system, realizing the civilian participation in politics and populizing the law, vigorously supports the political mechanism of judicial independence.The value of the System in liberty is indicated in several aspects as follows: firstly, it reflects the ultimate concerns on liberty out of its inborn lack of confidence in state authority; secondly, it accelerates the enforcement of power separation in judicial process and fundamentally guarantees the freedom of citizenship; thirdly, functioning as a designed system, it checks the exert of state power in a stable, rational and predictable way.Its value in Justice is manifested in the introduction of veto power, which authorizes Jury or Jurors to neglect the result of the substantial law and which, to some extent, indicates the Justice of Natural law. The judgment mode by jury reflects the subjective justice of Jurors and the objective justice among the public. Thus, the System can be safety conclude as a bridge connecting subjective and objective justice.In consideration of its origin and historic development, Jury System is a formation that people employ to arbitrate their disputes with their rationality, and also, which is a demonstration people take to combat "ordeal". What's more, the lack of rationality, wisdom and sensibility for common people due to Judge's professional limitation, may give rise to the miscarriage of justice, while Jury System can effectively avoid this by the intervention of civilians. All of these are the indication of the system's value in Rationality.Originated from the former Soviet Union, the People Assessor System of China evolves through different stages. At present, the System is confronted with a series of challenges, such as the lack of the support from relative laws and the nominal existence of regulations. Nevertheless, the real predicament lies in the low standard of Judicial Professionalism and the immaturity of the conditions for the establishment, evolvement and exertion of the System. These, though, can't justify the abolishment of the System. As the judicial professionalism is inevitable and malpractice is bound to emerge, the System will play a positive role in striking corrupt practice.For the improvement of China's people Assessor System, here are the points to be followed:First of all, qualification for People Assessor (PA) shall be discreetly prescribed. PA in an individual case shall...