Research On Court Hearing In Death-penalty Case Trial Of Second Instance

Death penalty is a severe punishment relating to deprivation of a defendant's life, therefore, strict control and discreet application of it is our country's consistent policy, meanwhile, criminal justice system of death penalty has continuously been improved in order to guarantee the quality of death penalty cases and strengthen judicial protection of human rights. All sessions in our country to hear cases involving death sentence have been opened in second instance since July 1,2006, and on september 21 of the same year, Supreme People's Court and Supreme People's Procuratorate jointly issued a criminal judicial document Rules on some issues concerning the opening of a session to hear a case involved in death penalty sentence in second instance (proposed), which contains detailed stipulations on procedural issues relating to opening a session to hear cases involving death sentence in second instance. Nearly after 5 years operation and enforcement, the work on opening a session to hear a death penalty case in second instance has acquired an obvious effect, however, some problems which shall never be neglected also exist at the same time. The writer, as a provincial prosecutor, and from this angle, combining 5 years experience of handling death penalty cases in second instance, tries to analyse the current situation and defects of opening sessions to hear cases involving death sentence in second instance, put forward some suggestions on improvement of the procedure, and wishes the effort to be of any help to the present juducial practice.The article includes altogether four parts:The first part summarizes the practical effect achieved in opening sessions hearing death penalty cases in second instance. This work, by implementing strict control and careful application of death penalty and tempering lenient and stern punishment criminal policy, has raised the level of criminal judicial protection of human rights; by enhancing judicial officers' ideal of "ruled on evidence", strengthening supervision over investigation of death penalty cases, reinforcing evidential standards of examination and prosecution, intensifying supervision over trials of death sentence cases in second instance, has improved our nation's criminal justice; and by standardizing trial procedure of death sentence cases, has ensured realization of substantial justice and a good social effect.The second part points out problems existing in sessions hearing death sentence cases in second instance. Although this work has made remarkable achievements, yet, due to complexity of practical operation, some problems did inevitably occur, including both procedural and substantial issues as follow:the system of witnesses, experts and investigators to appear in court as witnesses could not fully implemented; proceeding efficiency was lower; defenders'function could not be exerted completely; Procuratorial organs'functions and status in second instance procedures concerning death sentence was embarrassing; Procuratorial organs and courts had different cognitions over applications of death penalty and related evidence rules; Determination on victims'fault and its influence were not unified; civil compensation's effect upon applications of death sentence had an absolute tendency; cognitive divergence still existed over connotation and sentence of "cases caused by disputes occurring among marriage, family or neighbor relations"; Voluntary surrender came to have an absolute effect upon application of death sentence; Sentence in cases of joint crime were not kept in balance etc.The third part analyses causes of above-mentioned problems as follow:there are no detailed rules on witness's appearance in court; loopholes exist in time limit of proceedings; defending rights cannot have an equal position with prosecuting authorities; Demarcation between Procuratorial organ's prosecuting authorities and its legal supervision functions is not yet clear; there is lack of basis on procuratorial supervision over the court's application of civil mediation and sentence circumstances; measures are not implemented concerning subsidies of a witness to appear in court and protection of his private secrets; implementation of defender's system still has a weak foundation; lack of corresponding measures exists concerning loopholes of supervision over investigation and interrogation scenes and interrogating time.The fourth part, in the light of problems existing above, based on analysis of their causes, puts forward suggestions on improvement both from procedural and substantial aspect, including clear stipulations on time limit for procuratorial organs to examine the case files; improving systems for witnesses and experts to appear in court; drawing up obligatory regulations for investigators to appear in court as witnesses; perfecting defence system of cases involved in death sentence; specifying norms of evidence and standards of proof; distinguishing procuratorial organs'functions between legal supervision and public prosecution; implementing nation's compensation and relief systems for victims in death penalty cases; and normalizing civil compensation's influence upon sentence and regulating discretionary circumstances of sentence which is common but open to different interpretations.