Institutional Purposes of Chinese Courts: Examining Judicial Guiding Cases in China Through a New Analytic Framework

Jiajun Luo
{"title":"Institutional Purposes of Chinese Courts: Examining Judicial Guiding Cases in China Through a New Analytic Framework","authors":"Jiajun Luo","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2993424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article seeks to answer the question “what Chinese courts, as institutions are looking for” through empirically examining institutional purposes in judicial Guiding Cases published by the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) in China. This article has proposed a new analytic framework to interpret institutional purposes of courts in People’s Republic of China (PRC) authoritarian context. Under such new analytic framework, we have divided institutional purposes of Chinese courts into self/institutional interests and preferring values/public policies. \nContrast with hyper-political cases, where PRC courts focus on protecting self-interest and institutional integrity of the courts as third-party dispute resolving institution, in judicial guiding cases system we have validated our theoretical model regarding institutional purposes of PRC courts. One the one hand, in a number of judicial guiding cases, we have identified vital self-interests of judges, and courts’ institutional interest to increase professionalism to attain more power and enhance socio-politico status. On the other hand, some other guiding cases reflect strong institutional tendency of Chinese courts, both the SPC and lower courts, to pursue traditional, activist and restraining values. \nIn short, this article not only seeks to a new empirical way to examine PRC court in the most sophisticated authoritarian environment in the world, but also aims to contribute to our understanding regarding institutional characters of judiciaries by testing general theory via judicial behaviors and judicial politics in China’s context.","PeriodicalId":428432,"journal":{"name":"CELS 2017 12th Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies (Archive)","volume":"339 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CELS 2017 12th Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies (Archive)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2993424","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Article seeks to answer the question “what Chinese courts, as institutions are looking for” through empirically examining institutional purposes in judicial Guiding Cases published by the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) in China. This article has proposed a new analytic framework to interpret institutional purposes of courts in People’s Republic of China (PRC) authoritarian context. Under such new analytic framework, we have divided institutional purposes of Chinese courts into self/institutional interests and preferring values/public policies. Contrast with hyper-political cases, where PRC courts focus on protecting self-interest and institutional integrity of the courts as third-party dispute resolving institution, in judicial guiding cases system we have validated our theoretical model regarding institutional purposes of PRC courts. One the one hand, in a number of judicial guiding cases, we have identified vital self-interests of judges, and courts’ institutional interest to increase professionalism to attain more power and enhance socio-politico status. On the other hand, some other guiding cases reflect strong institutional tendency of Chinese courts, both the SPC and lower courts, to pursue traditional, activist and restraining values. In short, this article not only seeks to a new empirical way to examine PRC court in the most sophisticated authoritarian environment in the world, but also aims to contribute to our understanding regarding institutional characters of judiciaries by testing general theory via judicial behaviors and judicial politics in China’s context.
中国法院的制度目的:从一个新的分析框架审视中国司法指导性案例
本文通过对中国最高人民法院发布的司法指导性案例中的制度目的进行实证考察,试图回答“作为制度的中国法院在寻找什么”这一问题。本文提出了一个新的分析框架来解释中华人民共和国(PRC)威权语境下法院的制度目的。在这一新的分析框架下,我们将中国法院的制度目的划分为自我/制度利益和偏好价值/公共政策。与中国法院侧重于保护自身利益和法院作为第三方争议解决机构的制度完整性的超政治性案例相比,在司法指导性案例系统中,我们验证了我们关于中国法院制度目的的理论模型。一方面,在一批司法指导性案例中,明确了法官自身的切身利益,明确了法院提高专业性、获取更多权力、提升社会政治地位的制度利益。另一方面,其他一些指导性案例反映了中国法院——无论是最高人民法院还是下级法院——追求传统的、积极的、克制的价值观的强烈制度倾向。简而言之,本文不仅寻求一种新的实证方式来审视世界上最复杂的专制环境中的中国法院,而且还旨在通过在中国背景下通过司法行为和司法政治来检验一般理论,从而有助于我们对司法机构制度特征的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信