中美司法法律制度比较

中美司法法律制度比较 Jenny was compiled in January 2021

A Comparison of Judicature And legal System between China and U S China and the United States are two main powerful counties

in economic and military fields in the world. Nevertheless, in the political system and social and cultural aspects, there are many crucial differences between them. These differences are

too excessive too tremendous and too deep-going, as a result, the two counties diverge markedly when it comes to almost every international affair. We don’t have that wisdom and strength

of researching and probing those differences. That being so, let’s give it a head start in the judicial system and law.

Judicial system

Judicial system of US is totally different from ours. Firstly, America’s judiciary is one branch of that three branches—the legislative branch, the executive branch and the judicial branch. Those three branches divide national government’s power into three. This division of authority is known as a system of checks and balances established by the Constitution, which is meant to prevent any of the three branches from having too much power. Each branch has certain controls over the other branches. Each branch can limit the

other branches from gaining too much power. In other words, each branch of the three branches is equal to each other. It’s impossible to let one be dominated by another. So Courts in America don’t care about what the administrators think. They just make the verdict according to the Constitution and law and on the basis of evidence. But in China, the case is completely different. Inversely, China government pursues the centralization political system rather than the tripartite political system of checks and balances .Judicial system in China is not a party of checks and balances, not at all. More importantly, in order to segment and weaken judiciary’s power, status and weight, the judicial system itself has been divided into many branches, mainly the Court and Procuratorate. Courts in China is just a little department in national political system, which can be controlled and impacted by many other government’s branches, for example, National People’s Congress Standing Committee, Office of Legislative

Affairs ,judicial bureau and Law Council of various levels CPC Committee and so on. To some degree, China’s judiciary is just a mouthpiece. Laws are just reference. Leader’s written instruction or comments are real and potential criterion. So we can see that the status and importance of judicial system in

America are higher and more significant than it in China. What’s more, America’s judicial system is independent and

self-governed, but a mighty and independent judicial system can’t be found in China. A case’s affirmation and verdict have to be directed and interfered by many individuals and organizations in China. For instance, if a government’s leader or official breaks the law and commits, the judicial department can’t accept the lawsuit and enquire him at once, before the CDIC(Commission for Discipline Inspection of the CPC) investigate his behavior and make decision that whether he should be pushed into the judicial system. If the offender is a departmental or higher level cadre, reviewing him have to be approved and ratified by the central committee of the Communist Party of China. That is to say，if a leader or official killed hundreds of people, raped hundreds maidens and corrupted hundreds millions, the courts can’t do anything to him before the CDIC confirms his atrocities and crimes even though victims have prosecuted him thousands times. Thus it can be seen that

in our country, there exists an organization which has much more power and much higher status than any other organizations. Before its rules, the laws are humble, faint and impotent. So, why do so many unjust and unequal events take place pervasively

and constantly Why do so many innocent persons have been extorted confessions by means of torture Why do those malfeasants and noble culprits can get away unpunished beyond the arm of the law and constitution. The reason is that we haven’t a completely independent and adequately powerful judicial system to restrict and contend against other political systems or individuals.

Secondly, a notable characteristic of America’s Judiciary

is its Jury system. Every court from the Supreme Court of the United States to a civic court has its own jury which is made up of 12 adults who are chosen at random from the local Electoral Register. In occidental countries, the jury plays a crucial role in verdict, while judges in a court just provide evidence and host the arguments between parties and then give the “charge”, or instructions to the jury. The jury’s

verdict is based on the evidence and on the judge’s instructions as to the law. After the jury has reached its verdict, judges and the court can declare its final court decision. So those twelve jurors who are all law-blindness are the real adjudicators and decider to a case. Jury institutions make sure that a case cannot be misjudged and that an innocent person cannot be unjustly treated. It can ensure the trial

justice, fair and impartial. It can guarantee the inculpable persons can’t be sentenced improperly and mistakenly. It can prevent those corrupt officials and illegal merchants from escape of law. Most importantly, because the jury is made up of twelve ordinary citizens who are chosen at random, it can let more people know the power of law and be proficient at trial procedure. Hence the law’s concepts circulate among people diffusely and deep. By on, we can see that the jury system is on a sound footing in the United States and it is very fascinating to the public. Actually, it’s popular overseas, including in countries without jury trials, maybe even in countries without rule of law. For instance, last year, Japan introduced a jury system for the first time in major criminal cases. But in china, jury system is a remote and shadowy dream. The Chinese government’s judicial idea is absolutely different from United States’. Chinese government could not put the

right of trial to people, at least not now. The reason is quite complex and hard to tell. But it is undeniable that our government has unshakable responsibility in this issue. The right of trial and even the rights of governing the country should be returned to people by practical action rather than just saying something. If we can do this, there won’t be so

many undeserved persons and mistaken cases. Courts and those judges will not bend the law for personal gain too.

Jury system has numerous advantages and merits. In short, not only that juries are competent decisionmakers, but also

that the jury system is an important democratic institution. Courts need democracy too. But there isn’t any democracy in a countries’ political system, the jury system, of course, is a remote dream.

Third, the two countries’ judicial systems still exist many other nuances which determine their judicial process is totally different, for example, the basic standpoint to suspects and attitude of treating criminals. The American judiciary pursues a principle to guide the criminal court trial. That is, the accused is held innocent until proven guilty. The defendant doesn’t have to open his mouth. The court must prove that accused person’s guilt beyond any reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt refers to the doubt that could arise in the mind of an ordinary, impartial, honest, reasonable and cautious person with reference to the accused’s guilty. The concept of holding the accused innocent until proved guilty makes sure that a case is not misjudged and that an innocent person is not unjustly treated. Even though the criminal suspect is proved guilty by

court and finally sentenced by jury, as a man, he still has

basic and fundamental personal rights which he deserves. He has been denied his entire or partial liberty. Or even his life would be denied. But he remains his dignity and some rights

which God gave him and no one can violate no matter in terms of law or in terms of ethics. Its influence and meaning is far-reaching and multitunous. But in China, the situations are absolutely different. Rather than America’s principle of innocence until proven guilty, China pursues a contrary

principle to guide the criminal court trial. The principle is

that the accused is guilty unless he (she) can prove his (her) innocence. A suspect, who are just suspected guilty, if he (she) can’t prove his (her) innocence and purity, would be

adjudicated breaking the law or be sentenced guilty by court.

So in China, policeman can arrest any individuals in street randomly and then transfer him (her) to the judicial administration. The individual can be you and also can be me. Mostly, before transferring to court, the individual has been tormented with some inhuman methods. It is clear to him (her)

that he can’t fight with some powerful persons and the authorities. What he (she) can do is admitting the guilt which doesn’t belong to him (her). He may also be punished just by

the police without any judicial procedure. In China, policeman’s role is very embarrassed. Policeman not only acts as executor to perform the law and policy but also assume some judicial responsibility and has some judicial power.比如说，警

察可以随便抓一个人去劳教所work camp让他劳动改造reform criminal through labor，而这改造可能是几个月，也可能是几年。这个过程则不需要司法部门的任何批准和ratification。警察作为一个行政者，就可以对人的自由甚至生命进行限制。更为严重的是，当警察抓获任意公民是，他们可以对他刑讯逼供，严加拷打直至他不得不承认自己的罪行。

有时候，这种行为甚至造成了许多无辜人士的悲惨死亡。这就致使了许

多本应受罚的罪犯逍遥法外，而这有些就是警察或部分政府官员有意帮

助这些罪犯的。这还致使许多无辜之人冤枉wronged 被迫害甚至致死。警察的这种行为是对人权的漠视。在中国的人是不具有人权的或者说不

具有完整人权，更何况那些嫌疑犯和已被定罪的罪犯。人权距离他们就

更加遥远了。

以上讲到的只是导致两国司法体制不同的众多细微差别的主要两点。

除此之外，还有许多细微差别我们来不及叙述。但就从这两点我们就可

以推断出来，美国的司法体系更加独立和完善，对待违法现象也更加公

正公平，即使有，徇私枉法的现象相对来说更少一些。而且他们对待普

通人还是受罚之人都尊重属于他们的权利，丝毫不敢侵犯这些属于他们

的权利和尊严。但中国就差许多了在这些方面，我们需要更大的进步和

努力。

法律制度我们