Skip to main content
main-content

Über dieses Buch

This book investigates and evaluates the indexes of Government Transparency, Judicial Transparency, Procuratorial Transparency, and Legislation by Local People’s Congresses in China. It explores a representative case study on the Rule of Law in Yuhang District of Hangzhou City, assesses the progress made and remaining problems in the implementation of these systems, and puts forward suggestions on how they could be improved in the future.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Frontmatter

Chapter 1. Rule of Law in China 2016–2017: Review and Outlook

Abstract
In 2016, China continued to make steady progress in promoting the rule of law construction. In the aspect of legislation, laws and regulations were formulated, revised or interpreted in an orderly manner, laying the institutional foundation for national unification, economic development, social stability and comprehensively deepening reforms. In the aspect of a law-based government, China proceeded with such reform measures as streamlining administration and delegating powers, reforming administrative approval system, and promoting the Internet Plus government services model. In the judicial field, judicial reform measures were gradually implemented, and breakthroughs were made in the construction of court informatization and basically addressing difficulties in law enforcement. With respect to rule of law in a clean government, a series of anti-corruption campaigns were launched, and the implementation of comprehensively strengthening Party discipline substantially influenced anti-corruption efforts and made due contributions to the construction of the international anti-corruption mechanism. With respect to rule of law in civil, commercial and economic laws, the legal systems were gradually improved and the intellectual property strategy was carried forward. With respect to rule of law in social affairs, reforms in social security, labor relations, environmental protection and other fields were further promoted, and the disadvantaged groups were better protected.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 2. Chinese Government Transparency Index Report (2015)

Based on Information Disclosure on Government Websites
Abstract
This report looks at 54 departments under the State Council, 31 provincial-level governments and 49 governments of large cities, reviewing their practice in implementing systems relating to the disclosure of government information. In particular, we focus on information disclosure sections on official government websites, normative documents, financial information, information about administrative approval, information about environmental protection, annual report on the disclosure of government information, disclosure of government information upon application, analyze the progress made and problems existing in the implementation of government information disclosure systems, and provide advice on the future improvement of the systems.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 3. Chinese Government Transparency Index Report (2016)

Based on Information Disclosure on Government Websites
Abstract
This report looks at 49 large cities and 100 counties (county-level cities and districts), evaluating their results of government information disclosure in 2016 from several aspects, including government information disclosure platforms, normative documents, information about administrative approval, information about administrative punishment, information about environmental protection, information about the redevelopment of shanty areas, information about public assistance, information about education, annual report on government information disclosure, and information disclosure upon application. In the end, the report provides an analysis of the progress made and problems existing in the implementation of government information disclosure systems, and advice on the future improvement of the systems.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 4. China Judicial Transparency Index Report (2015)

Based on Disclosure of Judicial Information on Court Websites
Abstract
The evaluation results of China Judicial Transparency Index for 2015 show that judicial openness in China is rapidly improving as pushed by the Supreme People’s Court (SPC). Although some courts are latecomers to the development of judicial administration, they have enforced higher level of transparency in information disclosure. Some courts have made a breakthrough in information disclosure of the judgment documents that ought not to be published online. Some have been paying great attention to the disclosure of judicial statistics and have partially made publicly available the information about judicial reform. Nevertheless, several issues around judicial openness are also found, such that similar disclosure platforms are being developed redundantly, the accuracy of information disclosure is low, payment for the disclosure of judicial information is required, data disclosure is still at a preliminary stage, and the transparency in judicial reform requires further improvement. Judicial openness must be promoted by accommodating to big data application requirements and adopting the top-down design with a public-oriented mindset. The courts are required to construct intensive disclosure platforms, progressively develop work mechanisms for information disclosure upon application, abandon the idea of seeking profit from the disclosure of public information, introduce the relief mechanism for judicial openness and build a judicial big data.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 5. China Judicial Transparency Index Report (2016)

Based on Disclosure of Information on Court Websites
Abstract
The evaluation results of China Judicial Transparency Index for 2016 shows that judicial openness in China has reached a new stage in an era of building version 3.0 of People’s Court Informatization System (v3.0). The intensified disclosure of information is taking shape, the judgment documents are being shared nationwide, the public can get a closer look at court trials, the transparency in judicial reform is improving and the disclosure of judicial statistics is being given greater attention. Looking forward, there remains much room for improvement in the construction of “under sunshine” courts to accommodate the requirements for the construction of smart courts, such as enhancing the adhesion between the informatization and judicial openness, implementing the reversed disclosure of judgment documents, improving the enforcement information disclosure platforms, strengthening data docking and jointly establishing the social credit system.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 6. China Maritime Judicial Transparency Index Report (2015)

Based on Information Disclosure on Maritime Court Websites
Abstract
In 2015, the Innovation Project Team on the Rule of Law Index of Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences optimized and modified the indicator system for China Maritime Judicial Transparency Index Evaluation and made the third evaluation on judicial openness of ten maritime courts. The results indicate steady improvement, especially in terms of informatization application, diverse means of disclosure and international standardization. To stand as an international maritime judicial center with wide influence, China needs to further intensify its judicial openness and build a uniform disclosure platform for annual maritime trial white papers, typical cases and representative documents.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 7. China Maritime Judicial Transparency Index Report (2016)

Based on Information Disclosure on Maritime Court Websites
Abstract
In 2016, the Innovation Project Team on the Rule of Law Index of Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences made the fourth evaluation on judicial openness of ten maritime courts. The results indicate that steady progress was made, good practices disseminated, and highlights presented. Maritime courts began to learn from and compete with each other. Meanwhile, some defects identified in previous evaluations were still there. It is crucial that some maritime courts “rushed” updates of their websites. China, to stand as an international maritime judicial center with wide influence, needs to further intensify its judicial openness, improve the quality of disclosure and form a distinctive maritime case reference system.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 8. Beijing Court Judicial Transparency Index Report (2015)

Abstract
In 2015, the Innovation Project Team on the Rule of Law Index of the Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences continued the judicial transparency index evaluation on Beijing Higher People’s Court and other 22 courts in Beijing Municipality. According to the status of judicial openness in Beijing, the priorities were shifted to the accuracy of information disclosure and information import, in order to reflect the progress and challenges in 2015. The Project Team also gave advice on improving judicial openness in the year to come.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 9. Zhejiang Court Judicial Transparency Index Report (2015)

Abstract
In 2015, the Innovation Project Team on the Rule of Law Index of the Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, authorized by Zhejiang Higher People’s Court, continued the judicial openness evaluation on the 105 courts of three levels in the province from the perspectives of disclosure of judicial affairs, case filing and court trial, judgment documents and enforcement information. The evaluation results showed that, courts at all levels in Zhejiang province well integrated judicial transparency and court authority regulation, and reported overall improvement in judicial openness. However, imparities were found in specific evaluation indicators and between the courts. In the following years, efforts should be made to push ahead judicial openness and elevate judicial capabilities through informatization.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 10. China Procuratorial Transparency Index Report (2015)

Based on Information Disclosure on Procuratorate Websites
Abstract
In 2015, the Innovation Project Team on the Rule of Law Index of the Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences modified the evaluation indicator system based on relevant legal papers. The modified evaluation indicator system was used to evaluate the procuratorial information disclosure on the websites of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the procuratorates of 31 provinces and 49 large cities. As a result, progress and challenges were summed up and advice for improvement was given concerning procuratorial information disclosure in 2015.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv

Chapter 11. China Procuratorial Transparency Index Report (2016)

Based on Information Disclosure on Procuratorate Websites
Abstract
In 2016, the Innovation Project Team on the Rule of Law Index of the Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences modified and improved the evaluation indicator system based on relevant legal papers. The modified evaluation indicator system was used in the quantitative evaluation on the procuratorial information disclosure on the websites of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the procuratorates of 31 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) and 49 large cities. This report, based on the evaluation results of the previous 5 years, is an overall, objective and neutral summary of the progress and challenges in the carrier and contents of procuratorial information disclosure in China. It also gives advice on improving the system construction and effectiveness.
Lin Li, He Tian, Yanbin Lv
Weitere Informationen

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise