I heard about the issue of the public release of judicial documents, and based on my own experience, I would like to comment on it.
Are judicial documents still public?#
First of all, the Judicial Document Network is not closed, and the website is still accessible. The notice from the Supreme People's Court states:
The National Court Judgment Document Library is scheduled to be launched and operated online in January 2024, supporting judges and court staff nationwide to query and retrieve judgment documents on the four-level court intranet.
The intranet refers to the court's internal network, where a judgment document library is established. It does not indicate the closure of the public network document library.
So why do people say that judicial documents are not public?
First, it is necessary for the sake of judicial judgment and the unity of the legal system to let all judges and legal professionals involved in handling cases know how judgments are made in other places. Judges also hope to have a place where they can directly query judgment documents, but the public network platform is too difficult to use.
Second, in recent years, the number of publicly released judgment documents has been decreasing, which is not conducive to judges' judgments. It is precisely because of the decrease in the number of public releases, combined with the current political atmosphere, that many people directly claim that judgment documents are not public. Whether they will be published in the future is currently unknown.
Public release of judgment documents is a double-edged sword for rulers.#
From the perspective of long-term civilization development, an open judicial system is necessary. This allows judges to dare to make fair judgments and lawyers to follow precedents. The public also feels the fairness and citizenry of the open procedures.
Rulers want to conceal documents to maintain their rule#
However, for rulers, on the one hand, if judges in various regions make judgments according to the law and fully disclose them, it may lead to the brewing of cases that endanger their rule and have a negative impact. For example, convictions at airports, charges of illegal business operations, and Article 285(2) of the Criminal Law, among others. Or some other sensitive information.
Rulers fear grassroots actions damaging the foundation of their rule#
On the other hand, if judgments are not made public, local courts will have more discretion and will not be controlled by higher authorities. At this time, internal contradictions within the ruling group are likely to lead to backlash. For example, everyone knows that Tencent often causes trouble in the Nanshan District Court. Provincial and ministerial officials can establish their own power bases because of the lack of judicial transparency. Of course, this is an exaggeration, but it helps with understanding.
Therefore, rulers want to have a certain degree of openness, but with limitations and under the control of higher authorities. This way, they can maintain a certain level of transparency while allowing localized corruption and preventing certain external forces from infiltrating. So, the claim that judgment documents are not public online is actually baseless speculation.
Even autocratic rulers dare not undermine legal authority lightly#
It is said, "Laws and regulations cannot be changed frequently. Frequent changes cause confusion, and officials cannot remember them all. Furthermore, discrepancies and contradictions between past and present laws lead to corruption among officials. From now on, any changes to the law should be carefully considered and implemented." ——Zizhi Tongjian
It is understandable that rulers do not want to disclose judgment documents. Now let's correct the shortcomings of non-disclosure. Emperor Taizong of the Tang Dynasty, Li Shimin, believed that laws should not be changed frequently. Frequent changes confuse the people and make it easier for judicial personnel to act in their own interests. Although there is a significant difference between the stability of laws and the public release of judgment documents, both aim to maintain the authority of the legal order.
Therefore, the non-disclosure of judgment documents is a double-edged sword for rulers, and even autocratic monarchs cannot do as they please.
The role of openness from the perspective of civilization development#
Openness is one of the eight inherent attributes of legal ethics#
As the saying goes, sunlight is the best disinfectant. The most basic element of procedural justice is openness. Fuller's "The Morality of Law" mentions that openness is one of the eight basic attributes of legal ethics. If there is no openness, even if there are no problems, the public will perceive that there are problems.
Misunderstandings about the non-disclosure of judgment documents#
Many people think that the establishment of an intranet judgment document retrieval library by the Supreme People's Court is not a big deal, and they are not entirely wrong. After all, political consciousness sometimes makes us see things in an extreme way and hope that our opponents will reverse course faster. These are manifestations of a lack of conservatism.
Viewing judgment documents with a principle of differentiation#
This article advocates the principle of differentiation, and the most important thing is to free ourselves from political whirlpools, open our eyes to what is beneficial to the development of civilization, and what is influenced by political views. The current political situation is largely determined by the previous wave of contradictions. What we can influence may not be the current trend, but the future trend. In this sense, the non-disclosure of judgment documents is not good.
The role of judgment documents for judges#
I once heard an assistant judge say, "Your document is going to face the whole nation." This is thought-provoking. It can be seen that when each judge makes a judgment, if the document is made public, the opinions of the public and the direction of history should be considered.
The role of openness from an evolutionary perspective#
From an evolutionary perspective, all structures of civilization must be highly integrated and establish more precise connections. The public release of judgment documents undoubtedly allows the judicial system, which originally encouraged independence, to strengthen its connections with the support of the public and obtain independent status. Unfortunately, this kind of connection is often stripped away and destroyed by the private interests of certain ruling groups.
Individuals evolve, while civilization evolves. It is not that monkeys have become humans, but rather that the part of the genes that mutated into humans has been retained, and monkeys will always be monkeys. But civilization is different; it is not just a change in genes but also a change in culture.
The appropriate attitude towards the public release of judgment documents#
Looking at it from today's perspective, it is infuriating; looking at it from the past ten years, it is sad; looking at it from the past hundred years, it is confusing; looking at it from the past thousand years, the public release of judgment documents, judicial independence, and the rule of law are unquestionable. We should not be disheartened; we should take it step by step.
Reference link: Notice from the Office of the Supreme People's Court on the Construction of the National Court Judgment Document Library