Research On Prosecutor’s Appearance In Criminal Summary Procedure

Prosecution is one of the basic functions of the Prosecutor’s Office, and to attend thecourt is the most direct way to achieve this function. The prosecutor should appear in court insupport of prosecution whether in ordinary procedure or in summary procedure. Since theenforcement of2012Criminal Procedural Law, local procuratorates developed variousmethods for prosecutor’s appearance in summary procedure and achieved good results. Butthere are still some problems in judicial practice, for both fair and efficient completion of thetask summary indictment prosecutors in court, and still need to be further improved thiscontent.This article is divided into four parts (exclusive of the part of introduction) and includes33,000words.Part I introduces the development and significance of prosecutor’s appearance insummary procedure. Through twice Criminal Procedural Law reforms, prosecutor’sappearance in criminal summary procedure has been prodigiously adjusted at its content.Through the reforms of Criminal Procedural Law, China now has criminal summaryprocedure and prosecutor’s appearance in this procedure, from optional becomes necessary.Besides, in previous judicial practice, prosecutor normally does not appear in criminalsummary procedure. However, after2012reform, to carry out the reformed law, combinedwith local practice, local procuratorates develop various methods for prosecutor’s appearancein summary procedure. Finally, prosecutor’s appearance in criminal summary procedure hasgreat significance, Such changes are in comply with the requirements of procedural justice,the need of prosecutor’s execution of his duty and the realization of litigant’s rights incriminal procedure and to develop the popularization of legal education.Part II is a procedural analysis and comparison stage. At legislative level, summaryjudgment is the core of so-called summary procedure. However，the realization of summaryprocedure’s value in protecting fair trial and promoting efficiency still depends on theperformance of prosecutor’s functions. Normally, the decision of whether the summaryjudgment should be adopted is decided on the stage of review and prosecution. From this perspective, the prosecution model in summary procedure not only refers to prosecutor’sappearance in trial, but also includes pre-trial preparation and post-trial supervision. Secondly,although the process and content have in common in the prosecutor’s appearance in ordinaryprocedure and in summary proceedings, but there is a big difference in the approval processand objects and so on. Finally, compared with extraterritorial practice, we both have paidattention to the direct participation of the prosecutor, and focused on the consistency of theagreement in the application of summary procedure, however they are different in thepositions and rights of prosecutors. Therefore, we should seek measures from the judicialpractice in our country, rather than simply learn experience outside.Part III points out existing problems in prosecutor’s appearance in summary trial.Practically, prosecutor is able to appear in all trials of public prosecution. Nevertheless, thereal problems in the process of prosecutor appearing in summary trial are the disorder ofappearance models, failure in full performance of informing obligation, lacking of substantialfunction and that some procedures are too cumbersome which apart from the purpose ofsummary procedure.Part IV propounds suggestions concerning prosecutor’s appearance in summaryprocedure. With the purposes to make up for the deficiency in prosecutor’s appearance insummary procedure and promote the sound development of public prosecution, in addition togiving sufficient labor, material sources and financial support, we also need to work outproper solutions to existing problems. Firstly, models of prosecutor’s appearance can beimproved through creative case handling and promotion of advanced appearance methods.Next, prosecutor should earnestly fulfill its pre-trial informing obligation. Furthermore,prosecutor, upon his truly understanding of summary procedure’s significance, should makegood use of its power of sentencing suggestion and the educational effect of publicprosecution, to avoid the formalization of prosecutor’s appearance in trial. Finally, we mayalso promote the efficiency of prosecutor’s case handling through simplifying litigationdocuments and some parts of the process.