China's Courts Publish Record Number of Judgments Online
China's courts have made significant strides in judicial transparency by publishing a record number of judgment documents online. From January to November 2024, over 8.1 million new judgments were made available on China Judgements Online, representing a 67.3% increase compared to the same period in 2023.
Broadening the scope of published documents: This includes judgments from a wider range of trial areas and case types, making fairness and justice more visible and tangible.
The number of high-quality judgments published by the SPC and high people's courts has increased fivefold compared to the previous year.
The number of online judgments involving substantive hearings has witnessed a significant 99.8% year-on-year growth.
The SPC's commitment to judicial transparency is further reflected in its Sixth Five-Year Plan for Reform of the People's Courts (2024-28). This plan outlines the development of mechanisms for disclosing judicial information, including judgments, court proceedings, and trial processes.
The SPC will also draft guidelines on judicial transparency, enhance monitoring and analysis mechanisms, and regularly publish judicial data. Additionally, the SPC will clarify the rules for providing and using judicial data externally.
While promoting transparency, the SPC emphasizes the importance of safeguarding national data security, personal information, and enterprise rights. This includes improving anonymization rules for published judgments and court hearing disclosures, as well as strengthening oversight of improper uses of publicly available judicial information.
These efforts demonstrate China's commitment to building a more transparent and accessible judicial system, enhancing public trust and confidence in the legal process.
5 Comments
Rotfront
These efforts can help prevent abuse of power. Knowledge is power!
Matzomaster
Publishing judgments online is easy; addressing systemic corruption is the real challenge.
Karamba
Transparency? More like a controlled release of information to maintain the facade of legitimacy.
Marishka
This is just a PR move. Publishing judgments won’t change the underlying issues in the judicial system.
Pupsik
Publishing so many judgments feels like a way to distract from the real human rights violations.