The Research Of The System Of Chief Procurator's Attendance In Judicial Committee

Chief procurator's attendance in Judicial Committee is one of the characteristic systems in our country's judicial system, is an important aspect of current judicial reform, and is a major action to strengthen the restriction of judiciary power, to promote judicial democracy and transparency.However, the judicial practice is quite different. The carrying out of this system encounters obstacles from various aspects, thus the system is thought to exist in name only. Even though few areas are exercising the system not bad, its original idea has violated the original intention of the system. The great contrast between the theory and the reality has reflected something needs deep reflection. To study the system, we should firstly button down the necessity and the feasibility of the system. The paper employs the method of combination of historical investigation, empirical analysis and value analysis to conduct a preliminary study of that system.This paper is made up of four parts. The first part is a summarized analysis about the system of chief procurator's attendance in Judicial Committee. Firstly, the paper returns back to the historical process. By commentating the growing course of that system in a way of narration interspersed with comments, a course from nonexistence to existence, from small to large, from mixed to separate, from legislation to practice, from rough to sophisticated, the paper finds out the system's unity of oppositeness with China's political system, and its compatibility with modern idea of rule of law. This characteristic indicates a certain direction for specific analysis and implementation of the system. Secondly, the paper takes the statistic data about the implementation of the system from No.2 Intermediate People's Court of Chongqing and its few primary court as basis, analyzes the current situation of that system from the scope of the case, the people who attends, the start procedure, the rules of speaking, the legal consequences and so on. On this basis, the paper indicates that there are three features of the system at the present stage, which are, semi-open participation, appropriate participation, and in-the-proceeding supervision. At the same time, the paper illustrates three functions of that system, namely, accusing function, supervising function, and coordinating function.The second part focuses on disputed theories and difficulty in practice, trying to properly interpret the significance and value of that system. At the macro level, for the sake of State Order, China's democratic centralism proposes prescriptive requirement for chief procurator's attendance in Judicial Committee, in order to exemplify the spirit of concentration of power, and to avoid absolute power, thus promoting judicial transparency and limiting judicial arbitrariness. As for the ultimate pursuit of value, the system of chief procurator's attendance in Judicial Committee can increase the case information the Judicial Committee members received, can overcome the difficulties aroused because of inappropriate report and indirect trial, can enhance the professional application of law, can avoid some member's strong words, thus lay the first stone for applying of law correctly. Moreover, that system can basically ensure judicial reason, impartiality of the judge, equal participation of the parties, publicity and transparency of the process, and end in time, in these ways it consistent with due process. Consequently, there exists the need for that system in reality.The third part squarely faces the defect of the system of chief procurator's attendance in Judicial Committee. This part considers that the current system improperly restricted the scope of cases needs chief procurator's attendance, which straightly led to inappropriate guidance. Besides, there are many more obvious drawbacks of that system, which includes the differences in opinions toward"who need to attend in Judicial Committee about a particular case", the difficulty in implementing the start procedure, the roughness of the speaking rule, the absence of procedural consequences, and the illegibility of the support mechanism.The forth part endeavors to make theory into practice. With the basis of recognizing the problems, the paper strives for the improvements of the system, puts forward several approaches targeted to solve the problems. The approaches are as follows, construction of a wide-scope supervising mechanism towards criminal cases, civil cases, and administrative cases, establishment of rule provided that chief procurator and deputy chief procurator shall attend the Judicial Committee, amendment of the start procedure, specific grading of the supervision about rule of speaking, improvement of the provision of procedural consequences, and clarification of the support mechanism.