Research On China Judge's Behavioral Accountability System

In recent years,the wave of judicial reform has pushed judicial responsibility to the peak of academic discussion.However,since ancient times,China's judicial accountability has always been inseparable from the results of wrongful cases.This kind of accountability system with strong administrative control has indeed brought some convenience to the traditional Chinese judicial management,while not in modern society.After careful study,it can be found that the wrong result is not necessarily related to the responsibility,and the reasons for the result are diverse.It is counter-intuitive to blindly use the wrong case as a basis for responsibility.Also it adds unnecessary occupational risk to the judge in practice.Besides,it might even erode the cornerstone of judicial independence,distorting normal judicial activities.It is precisely because of these ills that most of the modern countries in the world have successively abandoned such mode of accountability.With the blossom of the principle of judicial independence at the same time,the behavioral responsibility system based on judicial misconduct came into being.It should be noted that behavioral responsibility and judicial independence are "two sides of the same coin" instead of opposites.Therefore,mastering the basic principles,characteristics and purposes of the judiciary is the premise for studying and constructing China's behavioral accountability system.As a highly developed modern country,the United States,in its ethical system consisting of judicial independence,judicial ethics and judicial responsibility,built a mature theoretical system and specific mechanisms around the misconduct of judges,especially the 1980 Act and the judicial committee mechanism in states are the most important.This widely used and highly operational disciplinary mechanism is worth learning from.Notably the establishment of the judicial accountability system is a process of pursuing the dynamic balance between judicial independence and accountability,therefore,the balance between external supervision and internal self-discipline,legal rationality and judgement,democratic supervision and judicial profession is required.Since the behavioral accountability that meets the basic requirements of modern judicial independence and satisfies the principle of unity of power and responsibility is the inevitable way out for China's judicial reform,systematic and concrete construction planning is imminent.As far as the content of liability is concerned,the cause of responsibility should be limited to the misconduct of the judge,with the extent of damage to judicial justice and credibility as a standard,and the conduct includes trial behavior and ethical behavior,but the substantive part should be exempted from liability;The sanctions should correspond to the responsibility while the degree should be rational and de-administrative.In this regard,as far as the accountability procedure is concerned,the elements of democratic supervision should be strengthened,public complaints should be used as an important source of initiation,and the Court of Appeal should be the “first trial”,and the Disciplinary Committee should provide strict chance of petition.The accountability clearly points to post judge in the context of the post system reform,but attention should be paid to the clarification and division of the judicial power and other powers.The review process should fully draw on the useful experience of the investigation and the hearing.The special nature of the judge's responsibility requires life long term,so it should be corresponding to the revision of the existing Criminal Law,and detailed measures in accordance with the different circumstances of the judge.Finally,the behavioral accountability not only needs its own construction and improvement,but also needs the effective cooperation of other systems,such as optimizing and improving the environment of the judicial team,constructing a reasonable and effective system of judicial performance appraisal,emphasizing the adversarial process in judicial activities,strengthening the implementation of correction and compensation afterwards,and cultivating rational public opinion in daily life.In summary,theoretically and technically,China's judicial accountability system still has a long way to go.