China

COUNTRY

Political and Legal System: The People's Republic of China’s criminal law cannot be understood outside the political environment in which it operates. Chinese Communist Party (CCP) policy informs all aspects of governance in China, including the legal system. The death penalty in China, therefore, takes place within the context of a criminal justice system that is subject to the CCP’s interests. The Party’s overriding concern is to maintain the ‘stability of society’ and the environment for Party rule. Among the ways that the CCP furthers its interests are policy directives, appointments and political legal committees which oversee the functioning of the police, the prosecution and the courts. These three institutions are known collectively as the gongjianfa for the gong’an (police), jianchayuan (procuratorate) and the fayuan (court). They operate ‘within the system’ (tizhinei) and share privileged information among themselves. Lawyers are outside this system.

Country's Death Penalty Landscape: China is the biggest executioner in the world and a significant outlier. Over the past few decades, China has taken some steps to protect those facing the death penalty. In 2007, the Supreme People's Court resumed its authority to review all cases of death penalty with immediate execution. This has been widely seen as a significant factor in reducing the number of executions, although there likely remain several thousand each year. Politicised legal proceedings continue to undermine attempts to promote a fairer trial while the lack of transparency inhibits efforts to conduct research and hold the authorities to account for the use of the death penalty. In China, there is also the "suspended death sentence" which means that the death sentence is suspended for two years after which the court will decide whether to commute the sentence to life imprisonment or carry out the execution. A suspended death sentence is subject to lower standards of review than a death sentence with immediate execution. There are risks that the sentence is associated with unsafe convictions. Defence lawyers in China face legal, institutional, political and professional obstacles to providing an effective defence.

Country's Key Death Penalty Trends: There are currently 46 death penalty eligible crimes in China. These include both violent and non-violent offences. Lawyers and legal scholars observe that death sentences are most likely to be given for intentional killing and drug-related offences. Chinese legal practice places a strong reliance on a confession for conviction in serious criminal cases, leading to the risk of extortion through torture. The use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment remains a systemic problem. Only the police, procuratorate and court have the authority to order a mental health assessment for individuals facing death and there is a poor understanding of mental illness among police, procuratorate and courts. Lawyers, too, have little knowledge of mental illness or how they may identify the need for a mental health assessment. Lawyers experience difficulties meeting with their clients and restrictions conducting their own investigations, including calling witnesses for the defence. Lawyers cannot be present during the police interviews, but they can provide their client with information about the law, including provisions against self-incrimination. Lawyers complain about limited disclosure by the prosecution and that judges disregard their submissions. Legal aid is mandatory in cases that may result in the death penalty, however there is limited information about whether this is true in practice.

Country Geolocation

Latitude: 35.8617

Longitude: 104.1954

Contributing Organisations

Kind of Cases Contributed: The Chinese case briefs uploaded to this database are all cases which are in the public domain. They highlight significant issues around effective defence and fair trial rights which have been documented by academics, the UN and by Chinese lawyers themselves. There is lack of transparency around the use of the death penalty in China. Death penalty statistics are a state secret. Although in 2013 the Supreme People's Court set up China Judgments Online, an online database of decisions from all levels of Chinese courts, there are exceptions for what can be published. In recent years, millions of documents including death penalty cases have been removed from the database. If judgments are available for death penalty cases they are often brief and lack important information. For the Chinese case briefs, we have thus also included other relevant sources such as media reports.

Credibility of Contributing Organisation: The Rights Practice is a London-based charity which works to promote human rights (as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and subsequent UN conventions and declarations). Our mission is to build the capacity of those working for human rights. We have built a programme of work that addresses two strategic themes within China: enabling civil society and access to justice. For many years we have worked closely with Chinese lawyers, legal scholars and NGO workers to help prevent the use of torture, reduce the application of the death penalty and support civil society.

The Rights Practice (United Kingdom) worked closely with long-term Chinese legal NGO partners to compile and translate case briefs for this database.

Credibility of Contributing Organisation 2: Information about this organisation is withheld due to the security risks involved. Civil society in China faces the risk of surveillance, harassment and detention from Chinese authorities for human rights-related and advocacy work.

Supporting files