A Study On Sentencing Procedures

Sentencing procedure is the general term of specific sentencing method, sequence and steps specified to regulate the sentencing practices of People’s Court and on the basis of which, to guarantee fair sentencing for the offenders as well as meet the social requirements for open and fair process of discretion. Throughout the world, the conviction and sentencing procedures can be divided into two modes:separate conviction and sentencing mode, and unified conviction and sentencing mode. To a large degree, China’s Criminal Justice carries on the judicial tradition of the Civil Law System and adopts the unified conviction and sentencing mode. The operation of this mode is defective in theory and the thinking mode of conviction and sentencing; in judicial practice, its deficiencies have caused a great deal of trouble to judge’s judicial work and damaged the judicial authority and impartiality. As the rule of law institution in China advances and improves, people’s concept of law, especially awareness of their rights has been greatly enhanced. As a result, with higher-standard requirement for judicial impartiality, Chinese people call for both fair conviction and impartial sentencing from the People’s Court. In pursuing fair sentencing, people require that not only the sentencing results should be fair, but the sentencing process be open, fair and transparent. In order to meet people’s increasing judicial demands and realize modernization of rule of the law, standardized sentencing reform has been listed in "the Second Five-Year Reform Outline" and "the Third Five-Year Reform Outline" of the Supreme People’s Court, preluding the reform of sentencing procedures.The problems in China’s sentencing procedures are so severe that reform is imperative. In my point of view, to carry out reform, we should first of all make clear the basic principles that must be complied with in the sentencing procedure reform, which is a major prerequisite; otherwise, the reform tends to be stuck in blindness and disorder. In China’s sentencing procedure reform, it is necessary to distinguish between the three types of trial procedures that have been formed in China’s judicial practice, namely the summary procedure applying to minor criminal cases, simplification of general procedure, and general procedure applying to cases in which the defendant pleads guilty or not guilty. The reform needs to be phased in gradually. Specifically speaking, in the first stage, supporting systems should be enhanced on the basis of China’s traditional authority dominant litigation model and mixed procedure of conviction and sentencing. For instance, the system for public prosecutors to propose on sentencing and the court sentencing council voting mechanism should be improved, and the reasoning on conviction and sentencing in the criminal judgment should be strengthened. In the second stage, we should distinguish between the three types of trial procedures, namely the summary procedure applying to minor criminal cases, simplification of general procedure, and "general procedure" applying to cases in which the defendant pleads guilty or not guilty. According to the different characteristics of the three types of trial procedures, relatively independent sentencing procedures should be designed with their unique modes. Instead of adopting the relatively independent sentencing procedure for all trial procedures, we should establish suitable sentencing mode for each type of trial procedure in line with its particularity.