The judicial system in the Republic of China is part of the three-pronged government of the country, besides the executive and legislative arms. The system has its foundation on the civil law models of Germany and France, though with further integration of the local characteristics (Clarke, 2007). The system has undergone constant reforms and the development of adjudication in the past four decades. This essay analyzes these developments.
Deng Xiaoping was an economic reformer. He was also a commercial crusader rooted for judicial reform in the Chinese Republic as a propeller for commercial growth. Despite never having held any political office in the nation, the leader had a strong leadership voice in the country. Many referred to him as the “paramount leader”.
He was also credited with propounding the theory of the soviet style of law, which was the socialist model. He advocated for a separation of the capitalist divisions of the country from the socialist ones, where given towns and regions would be under socialism, while others were governed under capitalism (Lubman, 2000). This was incorporated in the 1979 constitution that reaffirmed the place of socialism in the country by creating a framework for communities living together in the communistic spirit.
In this initial face of reform, however, the focus was laid on the revision of key legislation, such as the law on marriages, as well as laws covering criminal procedures, with the focus being on easing the litigation and procedural courses. These demands for reform were met as drafts were pulled off from dusty shelves and reviews conducted on them, thereby creating an improved and robust legal system.
Further, the 1970s period saw the creation of a new law known as The Organic Law of the People’s Courts, 1979, which provided a fresh organizational structure for the courts. It gave an elaborate procedure on the appointment of judges, which aimed to avert the then rampant cases of corruption in judicial appointments (Liebman, 2009).
This law was later revisited in 1995, creating some modifications and passing a new statute known as The Judges Law, 1995. This new statute introduced a more robust foundation for a professional and specialized judicial system that was separate from the other arms of government and had its system of salaries and remunerations. It was aimed at extinguishing the judiciary’s dependence on the executive (Liebman, 2009).
In the same year, new laws on public procurators and lawyers were passed, to reform the increasingly unpopular legal system of practice that was marred with corruption and a lot of irregularities (Lubman, 2000). These laws were further reviewed in 2001, creating a bar exam as an entry requirement into the legal profession that was aimed at boosting the credibility of the profession and further building proficiency in the profession.
The judicial system is, however, not free from challenges and setbacks in its path to total reform. The Chinese judiciary, for instance, has a wide distribution of 3,500 courts all over the country, with over 170,000 judges. While this may be seen as growth and development in the eyes of the public, it drains a large amount of money in form of salaries and other recurrent expenditures. This leaves no room for further development of the judiciary (Liebman, 2007).
Additionally, the comprehensive reform process that has been undertaken in the past 35 years in China has done little to curb what may be considered as the real issue in the problems that face the judiciary.
The greater challenge that is faced by the judiciary emanates from the other arms of government and not from the judiciary itself. Therefore, a plan to change the laws governing the judiciary or the legal fraternity does little in uprooting the real challenge. For instance, corruption still thrives in various government departments in China.
Although the judiciary may do its level best to fight corruption in the judicial system, corruption still finds its way through other government arms. Thus, a broader approach to reforms should be taken by the nation in its entirety and not only the judiciary in seclusion (Liebman, 2007).
References
Clarke, D. C. (2007). Introduction: The Chinese legal system since 1995: Steady development and striking continuities. The China Quarterly, 191, 555-566. Web.
Liebman, B. L. (2007). China’s courts: Restricted reform. The China Quarterly, 191, 620-638.
Liebman, B. L. (2009). Assessing China’s legal reforms. Columbian Journal of Asian Law, 23(1), 17.
Lubman, S. (2000). Bird in a cage: Chinese law reform after twenty years. Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business, 20, 383-423.