On The Judge Referee Under The Deterrence Of Trial Grades

Where there is a country with a system of appeals, there are deterrence based on thetrial supervision rights from the higher court to the lower court. Such deterrence is differentfrom the constitutional trial supervision, also different from the People’s Procuratorate’sleaderships between the up level and the down level. In practice, it is often a relationshipbetween supervision and leadership. The lower court would be afraid of the negativeevaluation of the superior. Such as revoking the convictions, setting back a re-trial orcommuting. Thus the lower-level judges are extremely cautious when they referee, andeven see superior judgment opinion as “imperial edict”, this is the deterrence of TrialGrades. Based on such deterrence, the lower judge had to predict the judge of the superiorcourt when they referee, this prediction behavior is understandable. If this predictedbehavior is misguided, or the judge behaviors under the deterrence of such Trial Gradeshas gone wrong, this will generate the negative effect of Trial Grades deterrence. Thenegative effects of such Trial Grades deterrence will destroy the independent Trial Grades,an independent judiciary, trial procedures. Making the Trial Grades deterrence have apositive effect, we need to guide and corrective referee behavior of the judges under theTrial Grades deterrence. We learn from the system of common law and civil law countriesto guide the lower-level judges to referee legally and reasonably under the Trial Gradesdeterrence. The judges need to comply with legal process strictly, and conditionallyimplementation of the Instructed by Cases system and the introduction of the identity ofthe judges security system.