Towards judicial transparency in China: The new public access database for court decisions

Abstract

Since 2013 judicial reforms in China have intensified. While recent studies of the Chinese judiciary have focused on structural reforms concerning the jurisdiction of courts and internal court management, it has largely gone unnoticed that the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) has established an open-access database archiving the decisions of every court in China. On the basis of legal documents, secondary literature and interviews with experts, this study investigates the implications of the new database. We find that the database establishes new channels of communication that affect the relationship between the courts and the public, and the position of judges within the judiciary. Further, the open-access database facilitates changes in the structure of communication among legal experts, which in turn promotes legal professionalism. We argue that the SPC made use of the party policy on the direct accountability of the courts towards the people in order to pursue its institutional interest in a professional judiciary.

Decoupling: Marital Violence and the Struggle to Divorce in China

“…As part of broader government transparency initiatives, selected Chinese courts began publishing their decisions on public websites on a trial basis in the early 2000s, but in significant numbers beginning only in 2008 (Tang and Liu 2019;Ma, Yu, and He 2016). Prior to the promulgation of SPC rules in 2013 requiring all courts to publish (almost) all their decisions on the SPC's newly launched website, China Judgments Online (located at http:// wenshu.court.gov.cn/), provincial high courts regulated the online posting of decisions on their own websites under the guidance of the SPC (Hou and Keith 2012;Liebman et al 2017;Ahl and Sprick 2018). Some high courts, including those in Henan and Zhejiang, maintained their online repositories of court decisions even after the SPC mandated the transition to its centralized website.…”

Towards Smarter and Fairer Justice? A Review of the Chinese Scholarship on Building Smart Courts and Automating Justice

“…Their primary concern is the extent to which smart courts will improve judicial transparency to the public . In a sense, this is also the primary justification for these reform goals: to restore public trust in the judiciary (Ahl and Sprick, 2018).…”

“…New judicial reforms, launched in 2014, gave judicial informatisation a prominent role in the prerequisites to achieving reform goals. Since then, China’s judiciary has accelerated the mass digitisation of its procedures and archives of court judgements (Ahl and Sprick, 2018). It has also introduced live broadcasting and online video depositories of trial hearings (Fan and Lee, 2019).…”

The Role of Corporate Political Connections in Commercial Lawsuits: Evidence From Chinese Courts

“…The SPC judges still answer to the top party-state leadership, but they enjoy greater discretion in ensuring that the rulings reflect the legal records to the greatest extent possible (Ip, 2010). The SPC’s efforts to pursue self-empowerment, professionalism, and transparency reflects its own institutional interests of strengthening its sociopolitical status and reputation (Ahl, 2014; Ahl & Sprick, 2018; T. Zhang, 2012).…”