The past and present of the judgment document network, and what is the road to the future?

A few days ago, a "Notice of the General Office of the Supreme People's Court on the Construction of a National Court Judgment Database" circulated on social platforms.

Image source network. According to the document, which was signed on November 21, 2023, the national court judgment document database is planned to be launched in January 2024 to "support court officers and police across the country to query and retrieve judgment documents on the special network of the four levels of courts".

Unlike the China Judgments Network, which is also hosted by the Supreme People's Court, the National Court Judgments Database is only available for court personnel to search for judgments on the internal private network, and is not open to lawyers, legal researchers, and the wider public.

According to Caixin's December 11**, the content of the "Notice" is true.

After the national court judgment database is launched, where will the China Judgment Document Network go?After reading the past and present lives of the China Judgment Network, we may have the answer.

Past and present lives

When the Gazette of the Supreme People's Court was first published in 1985, it set up a special section on "Selected Judgments and Cases" in an attempt to make judgment documents public.

In 2000, the Supreme People's Court promulgated the Administrative Measures for the Publication of Judgments and Judgments of the Supreme People's Court (Fa Ban Fa 2000), which selectively released to the public the judgments and rulings made by the trial divisions of the courts, and one of the five channels of disclosure included the people's court newspaper network and the ** network opened by the Supreme People's Court, which came into effect on June 15, 2000.

In October 2000, the Guangzhou Maritime Court decided to make all its judgments online and open to the public.

In October 2008, the Henan Provincial High People's Court decided to make public all judgment documents of courts at all levels in the province that took effect after October 1, 2008 and were served on the parties by the end of 2009, except for juvenile crime cases, cases involving state secrets (including death penalty cases), commercial secrets, and personal privacy. By the end of 2009, the first courts in Henan Province had all their judgment documents online two months ahead of schedule.

In March 2009, the Supreme People's Court formally proposed it in the Third Five-Year Reform Outline of the People's Courts (2019-2013) (Fa Fa 2009 No. 14).In order to increase judicial transparency and promote judicial democratization, it is necessary to "study the establishment of a system for the online publication of judgment documents and an online inquiry system for information on enforcement cases."

In November 2010, the Supreme People's Court issued the "Provisions on the Publication of Judgment Documents by the People's Courts on the Internet" and the "Provisions on the Live Recording and Broadcasting of Trial Activities by the People's Courts" (Fa Fa 2010 No. 48), which clearly stipulates that "the effective judgment documents of the people's courts may be published on the Internet", and at the same time regulates the recording and broadcasting activities of the people's courts.

Since 2013, the Supreme People's Court has been established in the spirit of reform to promote fairness through opennessChina Judgment Opinion Network, China Trial Process Information Disclosure Network, China Trial Disclosure Network, China Enforcement Information Disclosure Networkand other platforms for judicial openness.

On July 1, 2013, the Supreme People's Court announced the launch of the "China Judgments Network".As an open platform for courts across the country to uniformly release judgment documents, the first batch of 50 effective judgment documents was published in a centralized manner. At the same time, the "Interim Measures for the Online Publication of Judgment Documents of the Supreme People's Court" came into effect on the same day, and the judgments, rulings and decisions of the Supreme People's Court that take legal effect should generally be published on the Internet, except in special circumstances provided by law.

On November 21, 2013, the Supreme People's Court promulgated the Several Opinions on Promoting the Establishment of the Three Major Platforms for Judicial Openness (Fa Fa 2013 No. 13), pointing out that it is necessary to promote the construction of platforms for the disclosure of trial processes, judgment documents, and enforcement information.

In November 2013, the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Publication of Judgment Documents by the People's Courts on the Internet (Fa Shi 2013 No. 26) was comprehensively revised, and the Provisions came into effect on January 1, 2014. The main contents of this revision are: First, the online requirements for eligible judgment documents have been changed from "may" to "shall", expanding the scope of people's courts at all levels publishing judgment documents on the Internet;The second is to change the "Internet approval" to "not Internet access" examination and approval, highlighting the requirement of "Internet access as the principle";The third is to emphasize the disclosure of the real names of the parties, which meets the needs of the public to obtain real information;Fourth, it stipulates that in principle, online documents shall not be modified, replaced, or withdrawn, so as to ensure the authenticity and seriousness of online documentsFifth, it stipulates that the China Judgment Opinions Network, as a unified platform for the people's courts at all levels to access the Internet, has established a convenient retrieval system to facilitate public inquiries, and so on.

Beginning in 2014, the Supreme People's Court has produced quarterly circulars on the online use of court judgments across the country, strengthening the unified and refined management of the work on the online use of court judgments across the country.

On October 23, 2014, the Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) put forward the reform requirements of "building a sunshine judicial mechanism" in the Decision of Article 4"Build an open, dynamic, transparent, and convenient sunshine judicial mechanism, and promote the ...... of open trials and procuratorial affairsPromptly disclose the judicial basis, procedures, processes, results, and effective legal documents for law enforcement in accordance with law, and put an end to black-box operations. Strengthen the interpretation of legal documents and reasoning, and establish a unified online and public inquiry system for effective legal documents. ”

In June 2015, the China Judgment Opinions Network achieved "full coverage of case types and courts", and the first courts of 31 provinces (autonomous regions, municipalities) and the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps have all realized the online publication of effective judgment documents.

On December 15, 2015, a new version of the China Judgments and Judgments Network was launched. Focusing on the two key points of "authoritative content and advanced technology", the new version of the China Judgments Network has brought a more humanized and intelligent user experience to all sectors of society, and the content has further covered the judgments in ethnic languages.

In August 2016, on the basis of summarizing practical experience, the Supreme People's Court revised the Provisions on the Publication of Judgment Documents by the People's Courts on the Internet (Fa Shi 2016 No. 19), which clearly stipulates five circumstances under which judgment documents should not be published on the InternetAt the same time, it stipulates how to protect the information of parties and other litigation participants, and how to carry out anonymous handling of judgment documents online. Except in special circumstances, judgment documents made by all levels of people's court nationwide that take legal effect shall be released on the internet within 7 working days of the judgment documents taking effect. First-instance judgments or rulings where a prosecutorial counter-appeal or appeal is raised in accordance with law shall be published on the internet within 7 working days of the second-instance judgment taking effect. The number of judgment documents published on the Judgment Opinions Network has increased rapidly. The provisions will come into force on October 1, 2016.

On August 30, 2016, Liu Xuewen, a full-time member of the Adjudication Committee of the Supreme People's Court, introduced at a press conference held by the Supreme People's Court on the disclosure of judgment documents that since August 2016, the China Judgment Opinions Network has received more than 20 million daily visits, with users covering more than 190 countries and regions around the world, and more than 500 million visits from overseas, making it the world's largest platform for the disclosure of judgment documents.

In October 2016, a 50,000-word "Online Public Report on China's Judicial Judgments" was published, which showed that in 2014, there were widespread delays in the upload of judgments. In the regions where the 30-day disclosure volume accounts for more than 30%, only three provincial and municipal courts are Qinghai, Shanghai, and Ningxia. The same report shows that it took 210 days for the first-to-last ** and 187 days for the second-ranked Beijing to go online from the verdict to the Internet.

On November 5, 2016, Zhou Qiang, then President of the Supreme People's Court, emphasized in his report on Deepening Judicial Openness and Promoting Judicial Fairness to the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress that some courts have selectively surfed the Internet for judgment documentsThe full disclosure of judgment documents will be increased, and a strict mechanism for non-online approval work will be established to put an end to the problem of selective online access.

On August 30, 2020, the total number of documents on the Judgment Opinions website exceeded 100 million. It took only 7 years and 2 months from the opening of the China Judgments Network on July 1, 2013 to the total number of documents exceeding 100 million.

On the afternoon of March 7, 2023, the first session of the 14th National People's Congress held its second plenary session in the Great Hall of the People. "The four open platforms of trial process, trial activities, judgment documents, and enforcement information allow judicial activities to run under the sun, and fairness and justice can be realized in a visible way. The words in the report are resounding.

On July 26, 2023, the Party Group of the Supreme People's Court studied and deployedOverall case management and the establishment of the people's courts' case database.

Timeline related to the establishment of the judgment opinion network.

As of December 13, 2023, the total number of document visits to the Judgment Opinions Network has exceeded107.9 billion times, the total amount of instruments1.4.3 billion.

According to the public data of China's court network, although the number of litigation cases in China is growing every year, the number of cases accepted in 2021 will be 30.51 million, and the number of cases accepted in 2022 will exceed 33.72 millionHowever, the number of public documents in the court is a cliff**.

Screenshot taken on December 13, 2023 on the Judgment Opinion Network.

Expert opinion

Su Li is Boya Chair Professor at Peking University

The decision to go online was largely based on political considerations, the so-called "democratization of the judiciary". It also has the benefit of further professionalizing and professionalizing the judiciary. The benefits are clear. But there are two issues worth noting. First, these benefits are theoretical, not necessarily in practice. The second is cost, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

If all the conditions are generally in place or permitted, I still basically support the use of judgments on the Internet, especially the judgments of the High and Supreme People's Court. In addition, the judicial system is accumulated little by little. Right or wrong, practice is the criterion of testing. However, this also means that in the long run, the authority of the judiciary ultimately depends on the development and improvement of judges, the courts themselves, and even the whole society, and it is unlikely that there will be a major improvement due to the online use of judgments.

**: Prudence, but not rejection: An apparently conservative analysis of the full range of judgments", Application of Law, No. 1, 2010, p. 50.

In a modern society governed by the rule of law, judicial openness is one of the important symbols of the progress of judicial civilization. It is generally believed that judicial openness has a dual function of the rule of law. On the one hand, disclosure is the best antiseptic. Openness can make room for black-box operations, and transparency can make judicial corruption have nowhere to hide. On the other hand, openness is also an important means to enhance the credibility of the judiciary.

Issues concerning the disclosure of judgment documents and the disclosure of judicial data. In view of the fact that the disclosure of judgment documents is inevitably limited by other legal values such as data security and personal information protection, and it is impossible to require uniform disclosure, then, in order to better reflect the actual situation and development trend of judicial practice, the court system should regularly disclose relevant judicial data to achieve judicial data disclosure.

Ma Changshan is the dean and professor of the Institute of Digital Rule of Law, East China University of Political Science and Law

The disclosure of judicial judgment documents implies certain problems and risks, such as the serious impact of unrestricted brute force access based on crawler technology on the normal user access performance, the protection of personal information involved in the case, and the direct or indirect arouse of public opinion. As for these problems and risks, we should not simply take down the published judicial judgment documents or greatly reduce the disclosure of judicial judgment documents, but should optimize the disclosure strategy and actively solve them.

In the digital age, major changes have taken place in the governance of politics, economy, culture, and society, and digital regulation has become an important option, which is more agile and effective than traditional governance methods. The evolution direction of the disclosure of judicial judgment documents is to make digital technology a propeller for the disclosure of judicial judgment documents to move towards a wider scope and higher quality.

Luo Laipeng, People's Court of Lichuan County, Jiangxi Province

Judicial openness is an important safeguard mechanism for realizing judicial democratic accountability and the independent exercise of judicial power in accordance with the law. Judicial openness includes two aspects: one is formal disclosure, and the other is substantive disclosure.

At present, there is still a big gap between the openness of trials in China and the expected goals. In terms of formal disclosure, the information disclosed is not comprehensive, and there is selective disclosure. Disclosure lacks institutionalization and standardization, and it is up to the disclosing party to decide whether or not to disclose and what to disclose, and the parties and the public have no right to speak or restrict. Judgment documents were not promptly released online in accordance with the requirements of the Supreme People's Court, but were "published in a bunch", concentrated on a certain day, presenting an abnormal phenomenon.

The road ahead

The online access of judgments was once seen as the most important step in the rule of law process. As an important part of judicial openness, the online disclosure of judgment documents is conducive to strengthening supervision and increasing judicial transparency.

Recently, a number of **** such as "Caixin" and "Nanfang***" have reported a roundtable meeting on the "Discussion on the Online Disclosure System of Judgment Documents" held by legal experts and scholars on November 26, and the background of the meeting is that the number of online judgment documents has continued to shrink in recent years. According to reports, the four scholars who participated in the discussion of the online disclosure system of judgment documents reached a unanimous consensus, namelyThe disclosure of judgment documents can be improved, but it cannot be reversed

He Haibo, a professor at Tsinghua University Law School, summarized the five meanings of the disclosure of judgment documents, namely: FirstPromote the administration of justice, so that the judicial power is actively subject to social supervision to prevent abuse;The second isEnhance judicial credibilityDisclosure is the best way to prove the credibility of the judiciary to the society;The third isClarity of legal rules, which is conducive to giving full play to the social effects of judicial adjudication;Four arePromote social creditThe market economy is inseparable from the construction of the social credit system and the data provided by judicial judgmentsFifth, yesInform important decisions

According to the Caijing E Law on December 12, it is not clear whether the construction of a database of judgment documents for internal use and a "people's court case database" that can be queried by the public at the same time will form a coexistence relationship with the China Judgment Network, which has been in operation for ten years, or an alternative relationship.

At least, judging from the past life of the judgment document network, the disclosure of documents is the principle. In recent years, the number of public judgments on the China Judgment Network has indeed decreased by a cliff, and coupled with the establishment of an internal judgment network pointed out in the online documents, it is reasonable for the legal circle to worry that the China Judgment Network will be closed.

Returning to the Legal Office Notice No. 551 2023, the author believes thatThe document does not directly point to the closure of the judgment opinion network, and the document also emphasizes again "in order to further regulate and deepen judicial openness". The Supreme People's Court also pointed out at the first session of the 14th National People's Congress that "fairness and justice should be more tangible, appreciable and felt." "The four open platforms of trial process, trial activities, judgment documents, and enforcement information allow judicial activities to run under the sun, and fairness and justice can be realized in a visible way. "It can be seen from thisAt least in the general direction, the principle of openness is still the same.

So, after the opening of the internal judgment database, what will happen to the China Judgment Network, which has been in operation for ten years and is open to the public?Perhaps, more exploration and discussion are needed, but at least for now, we can still hope and not be too pessimistic.

- End -