The Chinese judicial system has a hierarchical structure with the Supreme People's Court at the top, followed by high people's courts, intermediate people's courts, and basic people's courts at the lowest level. The system is controlled by the Communist Party and not fully independent from the executive branch. It aims to uphold socialist values and protect collective, rather than individual, interests in line with China's socialist system of governance.

1. Running head: CHINESE JUDICIAL SYSTEM 1
CHINESE JUDICIAL SYSTEM 10
Analysis of the Chinese Judicial System
Student’s Name:
Institutional Affiliation:
Analysis of the Chinese Judicial System
Overview
China has developed a system of judiciary that encompasses a
much wider scope than just the judges and courts (Wang,
Biddulph & Godwin, 2017). Other than the courts and judges,
the Chinese judicial system also incorporates aspects such as
the People’s Procuratorate, People’s Courts, justice department
and public security agencies. Both the justice department and
public security agencies are under the auspices of the Ministry
of Justice and Ministry of Public Security respectively. The
functions and powers of each of the above are defined by both
the Constitution and applicable laws.
The Constitution of the Peoples’ Republic of China vests all
judicial powers in the National People’s Congress (Wang,
Biddulph & Godwin, 2017). Consequently, the National
People’s Congress exercises the power granted to it by the
Constitution to supervise the Supreme People’s Court, the
Supreme People’s Procuratorate and the State Council. The
State Council is sometimes referred to as the Executive. Alone,
the basic structure above portends certain ramifications in terms
of separation of functions.
First, the arrangement effectively separates functions at various
levels. No power(s) is however separated. Accordingly, every

2. agency is granted distinct powers and functions which they are
expected to exercise without interfering with each other unless
the law so permits. It is only the Supreme People’s Court which
has the authority to render judicial interpretations. Courts are
not empowered to interpret or declare certain laws, regulations
or rules invalid. The power to interpret or invalidate laws, rules
or regulations vests in the Standing Committee of the National
People’s Congress. Jurisdiction of the courts is therefore
limited to the determination of the legality of administrative
conducts to an extent specifically permitted under the law.
Besides the limitation on the jurisdictional powers of the courts,
it is also critical to highlight the role of the Communist Party of
China within courts’ functioning matrix (Wang, Biddulph &
Godwin, 2017). The work of all the judicial agencies in the
People’s Republic of China is coordinated and monitored by the
Political-legal Committee of the Communist Party. As per law
established, the Political-legal Committee carries out primary
policy oversight of all the agencies making up the judiciary.
Essential Characteristics
No separation between executive and judiciary
Chinese judicial system is a part of the state. Basically, the
courts act as a pseudo agency within the general administration
of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). This is a common
attribute in most socialist states. Thus, the judicial system is
not independent of the influence of the state as the institution
represents one of the agencies of the administration. China
therefore embraces the principle of separation of the executive
from the Judiciary.
A people’s justice system
One of the fundamental duties of the judiciary is to administer
what is commonly referred to as a “people’s justice”. This is in
tandem with the aspirations of socialist democracies such as
China. A people’s justice by definition implies justice that
resonates with the interests of socialist aspirations of the people
of China. Contrasted with the principle of individual justice, the
people’s justice system of judiciary, courts in China serve to

3. protect the collective interests of the people against those of
individuals. Individual justice systems work to further
individual interests against those of the state.
Committed to its mandate
The Chinese Judiciary is generally committed to realizing its
mandate of developing the socialist regime. As an institution, it
is tasked with the responsibility of speedy adjudication of cases.
In addition, its obligations extend to educating the citizenry
regarding the socialist ideals which establish the foundation
upon which PRC thrives. Through the judiciary, Chinese
citizens are sensitized about the need to devote themselves to
the socialist ideologies which lie at the epicenter of the Chinese
society. Courts are duty bound to instill the spirit of adherence
to the norms and causer of socialism, Constitution and other
laws of the land. Just like other state departments, the courts
remain committed to promoting the integrity and unity of the
nation. Lastly, the judiciary functions to assist the government
in containing reactionaries, counter-revolutionaries and others
opposed to the socialist regime.
Incorporates people’s assessors
Cases are heard by the People’s courts. The people are usually
represented in the process of justice administration. Criminal
cases and counter-revolutionary related crimes may attract
masses to discuss and render suggestions. People’s assessors are
elected from amongst adult citizens who are eligible voters and
who have the right to run for elections. The Ministry of Justice
determines how the election of assessors is conducted as well as
their tenure. Assessors are no different from judges of their
respective courts as far as the enjoyment of equal rights is
concerned.
Judges elected by Congress
Courts in China are the products of election by Congress at
various levels of administration. Congress refers to the social
assemblies which exist at different levels within the Chinese
administrative arrangement. Courts and judges appointed by

4. Congress at the different levels are accountable to their
respective congresses. Power is equally granted to Congress to
ouster a judge from office.
Different nationalities, different languages
The judicial system in China grants all citizens of different
nationalities and languages the right to rely on both their
spoken or written languages during court processes. This is
particularly important given that nationals of other countries
may wish to participate in the Chinese court proceedings as
witnesses, accused persons or even members of the public
gallery.
Structure and Organization of the People’s Courts
The People’s Republic of China’s Constitution creates a unitary
system of courts that supersedes the individual autonomies of
the local areas and provinces. Accordingly, the hierarchy of the
Courts is such that no distinction is made with regard to
jurisdictions of state, federal and territories. A comprehensive
evaluation of the courts' hierarchy places the Supreme People's
Court at the apex and is based in Beijing. Just below the
Supreme People’s Court are the High People’s Court and
Special People’s Court occupying the same position within the
hierarchy. Moving a step further below, we find the
Intermediate People’s Courts. A good example is the
Guangzhou Intermediate People’s Court. Right below the
Intermediate People’s is the Basic People’s Courts. This is the
category of Courts established at the county level. Finally,
closing up the hierarchy are Dispatched Tribunals of Basic
People's Courts. Such courts exist at the county level. A
detailed analysis of the hierarchy follows below.
Supreme People’s Court
This is the highest ranking organ of the Chinese judiciary
(China, 2004). It also doubles as the court of the last instance or
final appellate jurisdiction. Ideally, no appeal can lie beyond
the Supreme People’s Court. Any matter originating from lower
courts can be heard up until the Supreme which prevails with
finality on any matter brought before it by way of appeal. In

5. recent times, the highest court on the land has managed to
establish a series of Circuit in provinces such as Zhengzhou,
Shenyang, Shenzhen and Nanjing. These Courts are under
special instructions to hear and determine relevant cases
brought before them.
As far as jurisdiction goes, the Supreme People’s Court enjoys
both original and appellate jurisdiction (Finder, 1993). Original
jurisdiction means the authority to hear and conclusively
determine fresh cases lodged before it for the first time.
Original jurisdiction applies both in civil and criminal cases
that the Court is mandated under its general jurisdiction to hear
and determine. As the court of first instance in civil cases, the
Supreme People’s Court has jurisdiction over matters of
national interest and concern and those that it deems appropriate
to hear. In this sense, the Court can invoke its discretion to hear
and determine matters not expressly stated by law to fall within
the ambit of its civil jurisdiction. The Court’s original
jurisdiction with regard to criminal matters extends to matters
which have a grave or great national impact. On the same realm,
the Court may invoke its original jurisdiction to review complex
administrative cases brought before it. The Court’s appellate
jurisdiction is limited to appeals emanating from the People’s
High Court or Special Courts.
Beyond adjudication, the Supreme People’s Court is empowered
to pronounce judicial interpretation (Civil Procedure Law of the
People Republic of China, 1991). This can be seen as a quasi -
legislative role of the Court. Judicial interpretations of the laws
and regulations as far as their meaning and application are
binding upon all courts within the territory of China. The court
is how however bound by neither its legal interpretations nor
decisions. It may depart from its earlier decisions or
interpretations if circumstances qualify such departure.
Additionally, the Court often issue guiding cases in order to
promote consistency in the determination of cases in lowers
courts.
High People’s Courts

6. A High People’s Court enjoys both original and appellate
jurisdiction. As a court of first instance, the Court exercises
legal jurisdiction over matters of major impact in their
respective geographical jurisdictions. What amounts to major
impact is not defined within the Chinese Civil Procedure.
However, this apparent lacuna has been somehow cured by the
Supreme People’s Court by suggesting that regard should be had
to the monetary value of the so-called matter major impact
(Notice of the Supreme People’s Court, 2015). In criminal
cases, the Court may exercise the original jurisdiction in
criminal matters with a significant impact in the provinces they
cover.
As an appellate court, the High People’s Court hears appeals
from all the intermediate courts situated within its territorial
jurisdiction (Potter, 1991). It has the authority to review and
approve death sentences. However, whenever it invokes its
review jurisdiction in this regard, execution must be suspended
for a definite period of two years. The two years is a statutory
requirement under the state's criminal law. Essentially, the two-
year stay of execution is important in monitoring the behavior
of the convict while in incarceration. Should they commit
further crimes while in custody during this period, the High
People’s Court can then make further orders authorizing
execution. However, if the convict displays good conduct, they
will be commuted to life imprisonment instead.
Intermediate People’s Courts
Intermediate People’s Courts are second administrative level
courts (Administrative Procedure Law, 1989). They are the
second lowest in the hierarchy. Such courts also enjoy original
and appellate jurisdictions. The original jurisdiction is with
respect to important matters from within the local
administrative units. As courts of appeal, Intermediate People’s
Courts handle appeals lodged from the Basic People’s Courts.
Original jurisdiction of the Intermediate People’s Courts applies
to the following civil cases; matter of significant impact at the
respective prefectural levels, major foreign cases or those with

7. foreign element and cases declared by the High People’s Court
to rightfully fall within the jurisdiction of the Intermediate
People’s Court (Administrative Procedure Law, 1989). Foreign
element, in this case, implies matters involving for example a
Chinese citizen living abroad, a foreigner living in China, a
legal entity incorporated under foreign laws etc.
The criminal jurisdiction of the Intermediate People’s Court
relates to cases that pose a security threat to the state, cases
punishable by life imprisonment or death penalty or those
involving terrorism. The Courts’ review jurisdiction extends to
matters brought against state councils, cases that fall within the
purview of the Customs or complex cases originating from
different prefecture levels.
Basic People’s Courts and Dispatched Tribunals
These courts are variously known as Primary People’s Courts.
They occupy the lowest position within the hierarchy.
Effectively, they form the third administrative level. Such
courts have a general original jurisdiction with respect to the
discretion to handle both civil and criminal cases at the third
prefecture level (Clarke, 2003). The jurisdiction may however
be limited by specific laws or regulations. Courts in this
category may create branch offices known as dispatched
tribunals in remote areas or cities. The dispatched tribunals are
usually found at the fourth administrative levels also known as
townships.
Conclusion
The purpose of this essay was exclusively to explain the
features and structure of the Chinese judicial system. Some of
the essential features have been extensively discussed in the
essay. From the analysis, it is evident that the hierarchy of
courts places the Supreme People’s Court at the apex and is
based in Beijing. Just below the Supreme People’s Court is
established the High People’s Court and Special People’s Court
occupying the same position within the hierarchy. Moving a
step further below, we find the Intermediate People’s Courts. A

8. good example is the Guangzhou Intermediate People’s Court.
Right below the Intermediate People’s is the Basic People’s
Courts. This is the category of Courts established at the county
level. Finally, closing up the hierarchy are Dispatched Tribunals
of Basic People's Courts. Such courts exist at the county level.
References
Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of
China (Adopted at the Second Session of the Seventh National
People's Congress on April 4, 1989 and promulgated by Order
No.16 of the President of the People's Republic of China on
April 4, 1989)
China, C. (2004). Constitution of the People's Republic of
China. Foreign Languages Press.
Civil Procedure Law of the People Republic of China, National
People’s Congress, 9 April 1991
Clarke, D. C. (2003). Empirical research into the Chinese
judicial system. Beyond Common Knowledge: Empirical
Approaches to the Rule of Law, 164-92.
Finder, S. (1993). The Supreme People's Court of the People's
Republic of China. J. Chinese L., 7, 145.
Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Adjusting the
Standards Applicable to the Jurisdictions of High People’s
Courts and Intermediate People’s Courts over First-instance
Civil and Commercial Cases] Supreme People’s Court, 30 April
2015
Potter, P. B. (Ed.). (1991). The Administrative Litigation Law
of the PRC
Wang, Y., Biddulph, S., & Godwin, A. (2017). A Brief
Introduction to the Chinese Judicial System and Court
Hierarchy. Asian Law Centre, Melbourne Law School, The
University of Melbourne.