II. Ensuring Independent and Impartial Exercise of Judicial Power Pursuant to Law

In accordance with the Constitution of China, the people’s courts shall exercise judicial power independently pursuant to the provisions of the law, and are not subject to interference by any administrative organ, public organization or individual. Judicial power belongs to the Central Government. The local courts are not courts belonging to local governments but the judicial courts established by the State at the local level to exercise judicial power on behalf of the State. Since 2014, the SPC has been cooperating with other departments of the Central Government to advance the judicial administrative reform, explore the improvement of court organization, build a recording system of case intervention and inquiry, and uphold judicial authority, thus forming an institutional environment and social atmosphere that respects judiciary, supports judiciary and trusts judiciary.

To push forward the unified management of personnel, funds and properties of local courts below the provincial level. A key point of the judicial reform is to push forward the unified management of personnel, funds and properties of local courts below the provincial level, which indicates the nature of the judicial power belonging to the Central Government. The pilot areas promote the unified management in an open, transparent and democratic way relying upon their provincial platforms. Firstly, the organizational establishment of courts will be managed in a unified way. The organizational establishment of the local courts below the provincial level will be primarily managed by their respective provincial organization departments with the coordinated management by the high people’s courts. The organization departments at city and county levels are no longer responsible for the organizational establishment of courts. Secondly, the personnel of courts will be managed in a unified way. The pilot areas will establish a mechanism under which the judges in local courts below the provincial level shall be nominated, managed, and appointed and removed according to statutory procedures by the provincial authority in a unified way. Prospective judges will be recruited by the high people’s courts in a unified way, and the newly-appointed judges will be selected by judge selection committee at the provincial level in terms of professionalism, and will be appointed and removed according to statutory procedures upon nomination by the provincial authority in a unified way. Thirdly, the funds of courts will be managed in a unified way. Necessary funds of the local courts below the provincial level will be fully guaranteed by the Central Government and the provincial governments within the budgets. The provincial fiscal departments manage the funds of local courts below the provincial level. The courts at provincial, municipal and county levels are all first-class budget units of the fiscal departments of the provincial governments, and will submit their budgets to the provincial fiscal departments. The relevant budget funds will be appropriated by the centralized payment system of the national treasury.

The SPC has established the circuit tribunals. In order to maintain the unification of national legal system, the SPC has established the First Circuit Tribunal in Shenzhen, Guangdong and the Second Circuit Tribunal in Shenyang, Liaoning, which have jurisdiction over major administrative cases and cross-administrative-division civil & commercial cases in Guangdong, Guangxi, Hainan Provinces/Autonomous Region and Liaoning, Jilin, Heilongjiang Provinces respectively. This has realized the shift-down of the exercise of judicial power of the SPC, and facilitated the people’s participation in the litigation and solving their disputes right on the spot. The circuit tribunals of the SPC are the standing trial organs of the SPC, and the judgments, rulings or decisions made by these circuit tribunals are the judgments, rulings or decisions made by the SPC. These two circuit tribunals take the lead to implement the accountability system of judge and the panel, profoundly promote the circuit trial system, and implement the system of interpretation of laws via cases by judges. These two circuit tribunals have become the “test fields” and “pacesetters” of the judicial reform of the people’s courts. As of December 31, 2015, the first and the second circuit tribunals of the SPC have accepted 1,774 cases and concluded 1,653 cases in total, with a conclusion percentage of cases within statutory time limit at 100%.

The cross-administrative-division people’s courts have been established. In order to solve the vulnerability of the cross-administrative-division cases to local influence, upon the approval of the Standing Committee of the NPC, Beijing Fourth Intermediate People’s Court in Beijing and Shanghai Third Intermediate People’s Court in Shanghai have been set up in December 2014, as the pilot projects of the cross-administrative-division people’s courts. These two courts are responsible for cross-region administrative cases, major civil & commercial cases, major environment and resources protection cases, major food and drug safety cases and some major criminal cases, with the aim to ensure the impartial treatment of cases relating to local interests and explore the new litigation structure that the ordinary cases would be heard in the administrative-division courts while the extraordinary cases would be heard in the cross-administrative-division courts. As of December 31, 2015, Beijing Fourth Intermediate People’s Court has accepted 1,893 cases and concluded 1,799 cases in total; Shanghai Third Intermediate People’s Court has accepted 1,370 cases and concluded 1,162 cases in total.

The intellectual property courts have been established. For the purpose of strengthening the judicial protection of the intellectual property rights and the unification of the adjudication standard for the intellectual property cases, pursuant to the decisions of the Standing Committee of the NPC, three intellectual property courts were established successively in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou in November and December of 2014. The SPC has issued a judicial interpretation that determines the jurisdiction of the intellectual property courts and has put forward guiding opinions on the selection and appointment of the judges and the participation of the technology investigators in the litigation activities in the intellectual property courts. As of December 31, 2015, the three intellectual property courts in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou have accepted over 14,000 intellectual property rights cases of all kinds. Through the concentrated trials of typical cases, the issuance of typical cases, holding press conference and other approaches, the intellectual property courts has built up a new image of the judicial protection of the intellectual property rights in China.

To explore centralized jurisdiction of the administrative cases beyond administrative divisions. In order to find solutions to the prominent difficulties of accepting, trying and enforcing administrative cases, the SPC has promulgated the Guiding Opinions on the Cross-Administrative-Division Centralized Jurisdiction of Administrative Cases of the People’s Courts to authorize the high people’s courts to designate several people’s courts to hear cross-administrative-division administrative cases based on the situations of their adjudication work. Fujian High People’s Court has designated some administrative cases of first instance to the jurisdiction of the primary or intermediate people’s courts other than the original courts of jurisdiction in a unified way. Such practice leads to impartial adjudication of various administrative cases in accordance with the law and eliminate the people’s concern that “all bureaucrats shield each other”.

To improve the specialized jurisdiction system of maritime cases. The number of established maritime adjudication organs and the accepted maritime cases in China top the world. In order to expand blue economy and promote “One Belt And One Road” initiative, the SPC reasonably adjusts maritime litigation jurisdiction system, expands the case acceptance scope by maritime courts through issuing judicial interpretation, and facilitates the establishment of a specialized jurisdiction system of maritime cases which centers on civil and commercial cases with a reasonable coverage of other areas. On December 16, 2015, with the aims of advancing maritime judicial innovation in terms of theory and practice, training excellent maritime adjudication talents and strengthening judicial communication and cooperation between China and foreign countries, the SPC established the International Maritime Justice Research Base and the Qingdao Maritime Branch of National Judges College in Qingdao, Shandong province.

To strengthen judicial protection of environment and resources. The SPC set up an environment and resources tribunal in June 2014 and directs local courts to establish environment and resources adjudication organs. As of December 31, 2015, in China, the people’s courts in 24 provinces/autonomous regions/municipalities directly under the central government have set up environment and resources tribunals, collegial panels, circuit courts, with the total of 456. Guizhou High People’s Court has, based on the basin perimeter of the main rivers, divided Guizhou province into four ecological judicial protection areas, and directed 4 intermediate people’s courts and 5 primary people’s courts to adjudicate environmental protection cases in a unified way. Since 2014, all courts in China have accepted 29,677 criminal cases, 43,917 administrative cases and 191,935 civil and commercial cases in relation to environment and resources, greatly maintaining the environmental interests of the people. Tianjin Maritime Court rendered the first instance judgment on the ConocoPhillips oil spill case to confirm that ConocoPhillips shall be responsible for civil compensation to the damages caused by the oil spill accident and pay RMB1.683 million to plaintiffs Luan Shuhai and other 20 fishermen. Jiangsu High People’s Court concluded the environmental public interests litigation initiated by Taizhou City Environmental Protection Association by sentencing six enterprises paying damages of RMB160 million in total for environmental repair.

To improve the system that defends judicial authority. The SPC has cooperated with the Standing Committee of the NPC to promote the amendment to relevant crimes in the Criminal Law to defend the judicial authority. The Amendment (IX) to the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China adopted on August 29, 2015 amended relevant crimes: first, amended the crime of refusal to enforce a judgment or a ruling, by adding a statutory sentence and a provision of crime committed by unit; second, amended the crime of disturbing court order, by listing the activities severely disturbing court order as crimes, including assault litigation participants, insult, defame or threaten judicial personnel or litigation participants, disobey of court injunction; third, added a crime of fraud litigation,criminalizing the acts of bringing civil litigation on concoctive facts, and jeopardizing judicial order or severely infringing upon others’ lawful rights and interests.

To improve the system of appearance of the heads of the administrative organs in court in answer to litigation. The people’s courts have put the newly amended Administrative Procedural Law of the People’s Republic of China into practice, to improve responses to suits by the administration, and promote the the system of appearance of the heads of the defendant administrative organs in court as respondents. The percentages of appearance of the heads of the administrative organs of Jiangsu Province in court as respondents for administrative cases have reached 90% for two consecutive years and the percentage of appearance of the head of the administrative organs in court as respondents in 9 prefecture-level cities such as Nantong exceeds 90% and that in 59 counties (cities, districts) such as Kunshan reaches 100%. The county head of Haian County People’s Government as well as two of his/her predecessors have appeared in court as respondent in person for 6 consecutive years, making the percentage of the appearance in court as respondent by the heads of its administrative organs reach 100%.

To build a system of recording and reporting officials’ intervention in judicial activities and interference with the handling of specific cases. The people’s court at various levels set up special databases of the inquiry of the case information by external personnel within the case information management system. The personnel of a people’s court will comprehensively, accurately and timely record the documents, letters or oral opinions with respect to the specific cases forwarded outside the litigation process by any organization or individual outside the people’s courts. The people’s courts will summarize and analyze the content relating to the interference of officials within the special database of the inquiry of the case information by external personnel on a quarterly basis, and make a list of special reporting matters, and then submit the same to the relevant departments and the peoples court at the superior level. Personnel of the people’s courts who fail to make record or do not make accurate record and the court leaders who direct others not to make record or not to make accurate record shall be imposed corresponding discipline sanction based on the circumstances.

To build a system of recording and accountability of the insiders of the judicial organs who intervene in case proceedings. The people’s court at various levels set up special databases of the information of the interference in case proceedings by the insiders of the judicial organs within the case information management system. The case handlers of the people’s courts, who encounter interference of case by any insider of the judicial organs outside the statutory proceedings or relevant working procedures when handling a case, will timely, comprehensively and accurately record the name, unit and title of such insider and the interfered case information into the special database of the information of the interference in case proceedings by the insiders of the judicial organs, and keep relevant materials.