I heard about the matter of the public disclosure of judicial documents, and based on my own experience, I would like to comment on it.
Are judicial documents still public?#
First of all, the Judicial Document Network is not closed, and the website is still accessible. The notice from the Supreme People's Court states:
The National Court Judicial Document Library is scheduled to be launched and operated online in January 2024, supporting judges and court staff nationwide to query and retrieve judicial documents on the four-level court intranet.
The intranet refers to the court's internal network, where a judicial document library is established. It does not indicate the closure of the public document library on the internet.
So why do people say that judicial documents are not public?
First, it is necessary for the sake of judicial judgment and the maintenance of legal unity to let all judges and legal professionals involved in handling cases know how judgments are made in other places. Judges also hope to have a place where they can directly query judicial documents, but the public website is too difficult to use.
Second, in recent years, the number of publicly available judicial documents has been decreasing, which is not conducive to judges' judgments. It is precisely because of the decrease in the number of public documents, combined with the current political atmosphere, that many people directly claim that judicial documents are not public. Whether they will be published in the future is currently unknown.
Public disclosure of judicial documents is a double-edged sword for rulers.#
From the perspective of the long-term development of civilization, an open judicial system is necessary. This allows judges to dare to make fair judgments and lawyers to follow precedents. The public also feels the fairness and citizenry of the open procedures.
Rulers want to conceal documents to maintain their rule#
However, for rulers, on the one hand, if judges in various regions make judgments according to the law and fully disclose them, it may lead to the brewing of cases that endanger their rule and have a negative impact. For example, convictions at airports, charges of illegal business operations, and Article 285(2) of the Criminal Law, among others. Or some other sensitive information.
Rulers fear grassroots actions that undermine the foundation of their rule#
On the other hand, if the judgments of local courts are not made public, they will become more arbitrary and not subject to higher-level control. At this time, internal contradictions within the ruling group are likely to lead to backlash. For example, everyone knows that Tencent often causes trouble in the Nanshan District Court. Provincial and ministerial-level officials can establish their own power bases because of the lack of judicial transparency. Of course, this is an exaggeration, but it helps with understanding.
Therefore, what rulers want is public disclosure, but with certain limitations and under the control of higher authorities. This way, a certain level of transparency can be maintained, while allowing for hidden corruption and preventing certain foreign forces within the ruling group. So those who claim that judicial documents are not public online actually have no factual basis, it is just speculation.
Even autocratic rulers dare not lightly undermine legal authority#
The emperor said, "Laws should not be changed frequently. Frequent changes cause confusion, and officials cannot remember them all. Moreover, there are inconsistencies and violations between past and present laws, which can be exploited by corrupt officials. From now on, any changes to the laws should be carefully considered and implemented." ——Zizhi Tongjian
It is understandable that rulers do not disclose judicial documents. Now let's correct the drawbacks of non-disclosure. Emperor Taizong of the Tang Dynasty believed that laws should not be changed frequently. Frequent changes confuse the common people and make it easier for judicial personnel to act in their own interests. Although there is a significant difference between the stability of laws and the public disclosure of judicial documents, both aim to maintain the authority of the legal order.
Therefore, the non-disclosure of judicial documents is a double-edged sword for rulers, and even autocratic monarchs cannot do as they please.
How to view public disclosure from the perspective of civilization development#
Public disclosure is one of the eight inherent attributes of legal morality#
As the saying goes, sunlight is the best disinfectant. The most basic element of procedural justice is transparency. Fuller's "The Morality of Law" mentions that transparency is one of the eight basic attributes of legal morality. If there is no transparency, even if there is no problem, the public will perceive it as a problem.
Misunderstandings about the non-disclosure of judicial documents#
Many people think that the establishment of an intranet judicial document retrieval library by the Supreme People's Court is not a big deal, and they are not entirely wrong. After all, political consciousness sometimes makes us see things in an extreme way, hoping that our opponents will reverse course faster. These are manifestations of a lack of conservatism.
Viewing judicial documents with the principle of differentiation#
This article advocates the principle of differentiation, and the most important thing is to free oneself from the political whirlpool, open one's eyes to see what is beneficial to the development of civilization, and what is influenced by political views. The current political situation is largely determined by the previous wave of contradictions. What we can influence may not be the current trend, but the future trend. In this sense, the non-disclosure of judicial documents is not good.
The role of judicial documents for judges#
I once heard an assistant judge say, "Your document is going to face the whole nation." It is thought-provoking. It can be seen that when each judge makes a judgment, if the document is made public, the opinions of the public and the direction of history should be considered.
The role of public disclosure from an evolutionary perspective#
From an evolutionary perspective, various structures of civilization must be highly integrated and establish more precise connections. The public disclosure of judicial documents undoubtedly allows the judicial system, which originally encouraged it, to strengthen its connections with the support of the public and obtain independent status. Unfortunately, this kind of connection is often stripped and destroyed by the private interests of certain ruling groups.
Individuals evolve, while civilization evolves. It is not that monkeys have become humans, but that the part of the genes that mutated into humans has been retained, and monkeys will always be monkeys. But civilization is different. Civilization is not only a change in genes but also a change in culture.
The appropriate attitude towards the public disclosure of judicial documents#
Looking at it from today's perspective, it is infuriating; looking at it from the past decade, it is sad; looking at it from the past century, it is confusing. However, the public disclosure of judicial documents, judicial independence, and the rule of law are unquestionable. We should not be disheartened, but take one step at a time.
Reference link: Notice from the Office of the Supreme People's Court on the Construction of the National Court Judicial Document Library