Guangming Daily:

In recent years, some unjust, false and wrong cases have been corrected, and the society has paid broad attention. Since the implementation of the third National Human Rights Action Plan, what new measures have been taken to strengthen the judicial protection of human rights and prevent unjust, false and wrong cases? Thank you.

Li Xiao:

Thank you for your question. Since the implementation of the third National Human Rights Action Plan (2016-20), judicial organs have continuously established and improved relevant mechanisms to prevent unjust, false or wrong cases at the source. There are five main measures:

First, we have standardized the procedure for excluding illegal evidence. We have improved the mechanism for effectively preventing and correcting unjust, false and wrong cases in a timely manner, and strengthened the prevention of interrogation by torture and illegal collection of evidence at the source. 

Second, we have implemented a system of synchronous audio and video recording throughout the interrogation of criminal suspects. Public security organs at all levels across China have now generally implemented full-process audio and video recording of every interrogation process in all criminal cases. People's procuratorates have also implemented synchronous audio and video recording of the entire process of interrogating suspects of work-related offences.

Third, we have launched pilot work to ensure legal defense is provided in all criminal cases, and established and improved a duty lawyer system, which means that every defendant in every criminal case will receive legal assistance from a lawyer.

Fourth, we have standardized the case-filing review standards of criminal appeal cases, and improved the procedures and requirements for reviewing criminal appeal cases. We have sought truth from facts, looked into any mistakes, and corrected any wrongs we discovered. From 2016 to 2020, courts nationwide allowed retrials and revised verdicts of 8,310 criminal cases through the trial supervision procedure.

Fifth, we have continued to promote standardization in meting out punishment, regularize the judges' sentencing discretion and enhance openness and impartiality in sentencing.

Regarding the establishment of a long-term judicial relief mechanism in the future, efforts are mainly reflected in two aspects: First, we have continued to advance the reform of the criminal litigation system with a focus on adjudication, and adhered to the principles of "statutory crime and penalty," "no punishment in doubtful cases" and "evidentiary adjudication". We have given full play to the basic role of the first-instance procedure and the reviewing role of the second-instance procedure, continuously improved the evidence review mechanism, and resolutely maintained the bottom line of preventing unjust, false and wrong cases. Second, we have improved the right remedy mechanism. Thank you.