Author|Once
The second instance commands the first instance, so is the second instance still meaningful?
Our country has a two-instance final adjudication system, and the second-instance judgment basically determines the final outcome of the case!
How to ensure the judicial independence of the first and second instance is clearly stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Law and the Several Opinions on Improving the Judicial Responsibility System of the People's Courts:
1. The higher court may supervise the lower court, but the supervision method does not authorize "real-time remote guidance".
2. The supervision and management of trial work by court presidents and others should be carried out openly, and they must not express tendentious opinions on cases that have not participated in the trial!
However, the Qinghai Haixi Intermediate People's Court blatantly violated the above-mentioned regulations, saying that its own operation was in accordance with the regulations, but that the lawyers did not abide by court discipline.
What's going on here?
On May 11, when the Qinghai Tianjun County Court was hearing a case of 12 people picking quarrels and provoking trouble, a special person broadcast the presiding judge and the lawyer's statement live in the WeChat group, and a judge remotely controlled the presiding judge in real time, and this scene was filmed by the lawyer on the spot!
According to the reporter's report: The person who implemented the remote control is suspected to be the president of the Haixi Prefecture Intermediate Court!
This is a clear violation of the law, so the lawyer immediately called the police!
The computer evidence was sealed as soon as the police arrived at the scene!
At the same time, all the lawyers issued a joint statement explaining the basic situation of the case!
It turned out that after the first-instance judgment of this case in 2021, it will be remanded for retrial by the higher people's court in 2023!
On May 11, the trial was held again, and the presiding judge of the second instance and the president of the court concerned came to command remotely! Such an act undermines the judicial system and is suspected of dereliction of duty!
But the official response perfectly evades these key messages!
Yesterday, the official response said: This is the higher people's court guiding the lower court, in line with the regulations! It's the lawyer who doesn't follow court discipline!
Not a word about the identity of the remote control judge!
This is obviously a strong rhetoric!
1. The law stipulates that the president of the court shall not express biased opinions on cases in which he has not participated!
However, the president of the court is a judge of the second instance of the same case, and he already has a biased opinion, and he also participates in the trial!
2. Public power cannot be done without authorization from the law!
The higher court can supervise the lower court, but the supervision method does not authorize "real-time remote guidance"!
How can this be compliant?
Yesterday, the Qinghai High People's Court also noticed this matter and has organized personnel to investigate! Whether this latest circular represents the results of the provincial court investigation is unknown!
In this matter, the author noticed that after the lawyer called the police, the efficiency of the police and the sealing of evidence were very well done!
But such a report of results clearly failed the efforts of the police! I hope the official can respond to the public again to clarify their doubts!