Calls for vengeance should not sway courts

Several recent criminal cases have stirred up the Chinese public, after murderers were given suspended death sentences instead of immediate execution. Most prominent is the case of Li Changkui, who raped a girl and then murdered her and her 3-year-old brother. Li is facing a retrial on August 22 as a result of a huge public outcry after his initial death sentence was suspended, and some legal experts are worried about public anger overturning court decisions. What's the prospect of dropping death penalty in China? Global Times (GT) reporter Yu Jincui talked to Liu Renwen (Liu), director of Criminal Law Department of the Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, on these issues.

GT: How do you view several recent murdering cases? Do the criminals involved deserve a two-year reprieve?

Liu: As some of these cases haven't ended yet, I won't comment on them in detail. For example, Li Changkui is being retried.

What I want to say is that the abolition of death penalty is a natural international trend, and China is making efforts to move in this direction. Although eliminating the death penalty in China will be a long road, China is sticking to a principle of cautious use of the death penalty now.

On January 1, 2007, the power to approve the death penalty was transferred from local courts to the supreme court, which demonstrates the Chinese authorities are serious in controlling the use of death penalty.

In March 2008 the chief justice of the Supreme People's Court declared in the People's National Congress that suspended death penalties had become more common than sentences of immediate execution.

For suspended death penalties, if the criminals don't reoffend in the two-year reprieve period, they will be sentenced to life imprisonment instead.

The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress also moved to drop the death penalty for 13 non-violent crimes in the latest amendment to the Criminal Law.

This has a symbolic meaning, which could further demonstrate China's resolution to reduce the use of the death penalty.

GT: The public seems to be opposed to mercy being shown in recent cases. Is a sentence that goes against public feeling against the spirit of the law?

Liu: Public opinion has a definite impact on justice in China. The system doesn't exist in a vacuum, but must take public opinion into consideration.

Compared to states with a more rational and mature rule of law, public opinion interferes too much in China's judicial process.

It is a double-edged sword. The good side is that public opinion could supervise the process and prevent corruption. The bad side is that irrational public opinion can do irreversible damage.

Once public opinion is stirred up, individuals can lose their power to reason. The Chinese government attaches particular importance to social stability nowadays, and so when public opinion is strong, the court is pressured to bow to the public mood.

This is partly caused by people's mistrust of the system itself. Judicial corruption is not rare, and people hate the rich and officials. If we had a more credible legal system, public opinion wouldn't be so extreme.

But is the justice that the public demands real justice?

There are already controversies in academic circles about the legitimacy of Li's retrial. If public opinion forces the courts to break their own rules, the law will lose its dignity and seriousness.

GT: Is the traditional Chinese concept of "a life for a life" still applicable in modern society?

Liu: It's not a convincing reason to maintain the death penalty.

Experiences in European nations and other countries and regions without the death penalty have proven that social order is not affected by abolishing death penalty, nor is people's understanding of and belief in law and justice.

The abolition of the death penalty has improved public order in some places, which reflects that we don't necessarily need brutal tools to govern society.

Cultures can be improved, people can become more tolerant and the concept of an eye for an eye can be forgotten.

GT: After brutal crimes like the recent Norwegian shootings, some countries that have abolished the death penalty see discussion on whether to reintroduce it. Should this affect China's decisions?

Liu: There may be debate, but they haven't restored capital punishment, nor will they in the future.

For a short period after a society abolishes the death penalty, there may be a clamor for it to be restored after violent crimes. But in time, people move on.

The most severe punishment for criminals in some countries without the death penalty is life imprisonment without parole. Criminals can only be released until a group of experts identify they pose no danger to society.

Under such conditions, people will not care about retributive justice, but consider instead why the crimes occurred, how to prevent similar cases, and how to rehabilitate criminals.

China is reducing the use of the death penalty, but it's unrealistic to abolish it entirely at present.

We have to prepare the public. For instance, the public clamors for the death penalty for corrupt officials, so if we can reduce the scale of corruption, such as by introducing a property declaration system for officials, we can soften the public mood.

http://www.globaltimes.cn/NEWS/tabid/99/ID/670839/Calls-for-vengeance-should-not-sway-courts.aspx