An Empirical Study Of The People's Assessor System In Criminal Cases

The people's assessor system is an important form of people's participation in the judiciary and an important way for the state to demonstrate justice.However,the people's assessor system is controversial in practice.This paper conducts data mining on more than 3.03 million criminal firstinstance judgments in the country.The data show that some indicators of the people's assessor system in criminal cases have been good and even improved in the past five years,and criminal justice democracy has been continuously demonstrated.However,at a deeper level,the assessor system is also faced with problems such as the formalization of jury trials,the professionalization of jurors,and the gradual decline in the efficiency of jury trials.The game between the bureaucratic court and the state's powerful assessor system made the assessor system difficult.The solution is to let the assessor system break away from the court's dominance,play the judicial value of the assessor system,and enhance the recognition of the people's jury system.In addition to the conclusion,this article is divided into five parts:The first part introduces the research background and research methods.This part firstly summarizes the research value of the people's assessor system,then introduces the existing research and research methods of the academic circle,and draws the research method of this paper--the semantic mining method based on the big data of the instrument.Finally,from the perspective of judicial justice and judicial efficiency,the data indicators for evaluating the implementation effect of the people's assessor system are constructed,and the selection of data samples is explained.The second part is the data presentation of the empirical research on the assessor system of criminal cases in the past five years.This section presents the overall situation of the implementation of the assessor system in criminal cases in the past five years.The data is divided into six categories: jury trial rate,jury trial frequency,jury trial interval,jury case compulsory measure application,jury case sentencing range,jury case dismissal,trial efficiency.The author will also present the above six data for common procedure cases for comparative analysis.The third part analyzes the implementation of the people's assessor system in criminal cases in the past five years.This section points out that in the past five years,some indicators of the criminal assessor system are good,but there are still problems such as the formalization of public participation.From the shallow indicators,the jury trial rate and the frequency of trials have increased year by year,and the public participation has been expanding.Most jurors have more reasonable participation intervals.The jury cases have not been selected by the courts.The jury cases are highly efficient.At a deeper level,the jury's participation rate varies greatly,the jurors become more professional,the jury function is gradually alienated,the jurors participate in formalization,and the jury litigation efficiency is faced with difficulties.The fourth part analyzes the dilemma of the people's assessor system operation.On the one hand,the state ignores the judicial value of the assessor system,which leads the court to “accept the assessor system” through disciplinary jury and other methods,which makes the assessor system illusory and manifests as jury.Alienation of roles and functions.On the other hand,the public's sense of identity with the assessor system is not strong.On the one hand,the ordinary people lack enthusiasm for the assessor system.On the other hand,some jurors rarely regard jury as their own right.In the fifth part,the author puts forward measures to optimize the people's assessor system for the reasons leading to the blurring of the assessor system.The first is to explore the jury system led by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress,the second is to exert the judicial value of the assessor system,and the third is to strengthen the jury value recognition of the people.