Future Prospects Recent years have seen little progress towards further restrictions on the use of the death penalty in China. The erosion of freedom of expression and the right to receive information, after a period of some relaxation of controls, are hindering evidence and human rights-based discussions of criminal law. The introduction of the Overseas NGO Management Law, 2017, is indicative of increased official aversion to international engagement. The earlier rhetoric of step by step progress towards a rule of law in China rings hollow these days. The Chinese government promotes a narrative of overwhelming support among the public for retaining the death penalty. However, there are no known surveys conducted by the government of public opinion on the use of capital punishment in China. Empirical studies that have been carried out do indicate general public and government support for the retention of the death penalty.48 Analysis of online discussions by Chinese netizens, in a research report commissioned by The Rights Practice, reveal a more nuanced picture. Criticism of the “barbarism” of high profile executions suggests that it is misleading for the government to state overwhelming support for retention. Although discussions generally favour retention of the death penalty, there are those who publicly support abolition, especially in the long term. High profile miscarriages of justice and wrongful executions have led to public concern over the application of the death penalty. These cases have also encouraged online discussions about the unfairness of the death penalty for poor and vulnerable defendants. A 2017 study of students’ views on the death penalty, at a mainland university, revealed that concern about wrongful executions was the main reason given by those supporting abolition, this was followed by the lack of deterrent effect and the global trend towards abolition.49 One recent small-scale study with Chinese law students supports experience elsewhere that, when provided with information about alternatives and the risks inherent in judicial proceedings, support for retention of the death penalty declines.50 Anecdotal evidence also suggests that criminal defence lawyers with experience representing those facing the death penalty in China are more likely to support abolition than lawyers with less direct experience. While many Chinese legal scholars believe that the long-term trend is towards abolition of the death penalty in China, it is difficult to see what factors are likely to drive abolition in the current political environment. Perhaps the best we can hope for in the years ahead are further restrictions on the use of the death penalty through tighter guidelines. Despite the constraints facing civil society and public debate in China, there remain grounds for optimism that when lawyers, students, legal scholars and the general public have a chance to learn and reflect critically on the use of the death penalty support for its use ebbs away. 48 See, for example: Oberwittler, Dietrich and Qi, Shenghui. ‘Public Opinion on the Death Penalty in China. Results from a General Population Survey Conducted in Three Provinces in 2007/08.’ Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law. 2008. 49 Liang, Bin, Liu Jianhong, Lu, Hong.‘Variability of death penalty attitude in China: an empirical test of the Marshall hypotheses’. Crime, Law, and Social Change. pp 276, 293. 28 January, 2019. 50 Private communication with authors. 58