Commentator: Qiu Yanbo
Judicial fairness is the most important weapon of the country; The spirit of the rule of law and the faith of the people.
Recently, the "remote control" trial of a superior judge has caused heated discussions on the Internet. On May 11, in a criminal case tried by the Tianjun County People's Court in Haixi Prefecture, Qinghai Province, Judge Haschaolu, who was the head of the criminal division of the Haixi Intermediate People's Court of the higher court (the original presiding judge of the second instance before the case was remanded for retrial), remotely commanded the adjudicators of the court of first instance to interrupt the lawyer's speech through a WeChat group chat, and even helped the adjudicators edit the complete content of the speech in court, and asked the adjudicators in court to be "tougher" with the lawyer. The defender accidentally discovered evidence that the judge of the higher court "guided" the presiding judge to hold the trial through WeChat chat, and called the police on the spot on the grounds that the lawful trial had been illegally interfered with. On May 12, the defense lawyer reported the situation to the Qinghai Provincial Procuratorate and the Qinghai Provincial High Court, and was told that it would be verified and dealt with in accordance with the law.
Tianjun County People's Court Source: Beiqing Shen Yi
Some lawyers believe that in accordance with the mainland's "Constitution" and "Criminal Procedure Law," the people's courts exercise their adjudication power independently in accordance with the law, and the two-instance system of final adjudication is implemented in the trial of cases. If a person is dissatisfied with the first-instance judgment of a lower court and appeals, he has the right to obtain the right of supervision and correction by the higher court through the second-instance procedure, and if the first-instance judgment itself was made under the direction of the second-instance court and lacks independence, the second-instance trial loses its meaning. The actions of the Tianjun County Court and its higher courts undermined the mainland's two-instance system of final adjudication.
Source: Beiqing Shen once
On May 13, the Haixi Intermediate People's Court issued a notice stating that "the defender did not comply with court discipline during the court adjournment." A lawyer asked, what court discipline should be observed during the adjournment? The Haixi Intermediate People's Court created "court discipline during the adjournment", which was difficult to convince the public. When a lawyer discovers evidence of a collective violation of the law by the judges when the court adjourns the courtroom, can he immediately collect the evidence?
He Bing, a professor at the Law School of China University of Political Science and Law, believes that in order to ensure the implementation of the law, mainland law gives lawyers the right to collect evidence. Although lawyers do not have the right to collect evidence compulsorily, their right to collect evidence is the same as the purpose of the right to collect evidence from the public procuratorate and the law, which is to safeguard the correct implementation of the law. During the adjournment, the lawyer discovers that the judge has violated the law, and if the evidence is not taken immediately, the evidence is likely to never be obtained. In order to maintain the correct implementation of the law, lawyers have the right and should immediately collect evidence. He Bing said that the judges do not have the power to go beyond the law and exempt others from collecting evidence of their illegal acts.
Source: Qinghai Haixi Intermediate People's Court
In its circular, the Haixi Intermediate People's Court said that this was to "guide" the work of the lower courts and was part of normal supervision. However, the way in which a higher court supervises a lower court does not include "real-time remote guidance of the trial". According to the Law on the Organization of Courts, the lower and lower courts have a supervisory rather than leadership relationship, and the higher courts can only supervise the trial through legal procedures such as appeals and appeals (retrials), but cannot personally go into battle and directly direct the lower courts on how to handle the case.
The purpose of such a requirement is to ensure judicial impartiality and independence, and to prevent courts at all levels from becoming monolithic and thus erecting a trial-level supervision mechanism. The higher-level judge grasped the trial situation in real time through the WeChat group, personally went down to guide the presiding judge, and even helped the adjudicators edit the complete trial speech.
Source: Beiqing Shen once
The judiciary is a public instrument of the state, which concerns fairness and justice, and cannot be allowed to be messed with by certain judicial organs and judicial personnel. The reason why the national law stipulates that the people's courts exercise judicial power independently and are not subject to interference by administrative organs, social groups and individuals is to avoid judicial injustice caused by interference, including in the name of private individuals and in the name of organizations.
Justice may be late, but it should not be manipulated. This incident is a wake-up call to judicial fairness, and a society governed by the rule of law must adhere to the bottom line of the law and tolerate any form of illegal interference.
On the road to the rule of law, every erosion of judicial fairness is a betrayal of the spirit of the rule of law. Justice is not a game of power, but a guardian of justice. Fairness and justice are not social decorations, but necessities, and any behavior that affects the independent exercise of judicial power by judicial organs and affects fairness and justice should not be condoned.