Judgment documents are "judicial products" that carry all trial activities and reflect trial results, and have always attracted much attention. Recently, the online disclosure system of judgment documents, which has been implemented for more than ten years, has once again aroused the attention of the public and heated discussions. In this regard, the Supreme People's Court made it clear that it "has never 'stopped' documents from going online", but "the work of optimizing the mechanism for the disclosure of judgment documents has been carried out in an orderly manner". This dispelled the doubts of the majority of netizens that the online disclosure of judgment documents was about to "stop" and that judicial disclosure would usher in a "sharp turn", indicating that the people's courts' sunshine justice, represented by the online disclosure of judgment documents, would be "solid and deep", and would continue to "move steadily and far-reaching" in the process of optimization and improvement.
It is of great significance and value to promote the online disclosure of judgment documents. The Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China adopted the "Decision of the Communist Party of China on Several Major Issues Concerning Comprehensively Deepening Reform", which identified "strengthening the rationality of legal documents and promoting the disclosure of effective court judgment documents" as an important part of improving the operation mechanism of judicial power. In the introduction, the "Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Publication of Judgment Documents by the People's Courts on the Internet" summarizes the basis for formulation as "in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and other relevant provisions, combined with the actual work of the people's courts". This shows that the Supreme People's Court has flexibly implemented the principle of trial openness on the basis of legal provisions through the online disclosure of judgment documents. It is true that the three major procedural laws all stipulate the principle of open trials, but it is true that none of them requires judgment documents to be made public online. It can be said that the Supreme People's Court, based on the consideration of enhancing the credibility of the judiciary, has moved forward on the basis of the explicit provisions of the law, and has made it public on the basis of the legal requirements for disclosure to all parties, and this spirit of reform and innovation is worthy of recognition.
Optimizing mechanisms for online disclosure of judgment documents shall be further strengthened. The online disclosure of judgment documents is a comprehensive work that involves multiple parties and various interests, and in this regard, it is necessary to take into account the needs of all parties and seek a balance between the public interest and individual rights and interests to the greatest extent. The Supreme People's Court attaches great importance to the preservation of individual rights and interests, including the protection of personal privacy, in promoting the establishment of a system for the online disclosure of judgment documents. For example, clarifying the circumstances in which judgment documents are not to be disclosed, as well as the anonymous handling and deletion of information, are all aimed at preventing the impact of online disclosure of judgment documents on the privacy and other rights and interests of the parties. However, objectively speaking, in the course of operation, it is necessary to further strengthen the protection of the rights and interests of the parties in the operation of the mechanism for online disclosure of judgment documents. For example, the disclosure of criminal judgment documents, even if they have been made anonymous, may cause "secondary harm" to the victim and may also adversely affect the witnessMoreover, since the information of criminal defendants for misdemeanor crimes is generally not handled anonymously, it may have an impact on their return to society after their release from prison, and even affect the normal life of their close relatives. Therefore, as an important judicial activity, the online use of judgment documents should undoubtedly be operated "in accordance with the law". In particular, under the new background of the promulgation and implementation of the Civil Code, Personal Information Protection, and Data Security Law, the online disclosure of judgment documents should be more exemplary in implementing various legal provisions, fully satisfying the public's right to know and supervision, while taking into account the protection of the rights and interests of all parties and risk prevention. Based on this, the Supreme People's Court keeps pace with the times and optimizes the work of online disclosure of judgment documents, which is not only "necessary" at present, but also "necessary" in accordance with the law!
The online disclosure of judgment documents goes hand in hand with the establishment of the people's courts' case databases. The Supreme People's Court decided to establish a people's court case database, and of course I "raised my hands in favor". This is an important measure to ensure the uniform application of the law and the uniform standards of adjudication, and is an important system to ensure that "the same case is adjudicated together". Moreover, the case database of the people's courts will be open to the public, which will undoubtedly give full play to the important value of judicial openness. However, the construction of a case database cannot replace the effect of online disclosure of judgment documents, and the value focus between the two is different: the former focuses on "cases" and aims to unify the application of law;The latter focuses on "instruments" and aims to promote judicial openness. It can be said that there should be a mutually reinforcing relationship between the China Judgment Opinion Network and the people's court's case database: the former has become the source of alternative cases for the people's court's case database through the public collection of a large number of judgment documents;The latter exerts its reference and demonstration value on the basis of the disclosure of judgment documents through the refinement and supply of adjudication rules. Based on this, the future development trend between the China Judgment Document Network and the people's courts' case database should be to "go hand in hand" and promote the uniform application of law on the basis of deepening judicial openness. In this regard, I am pleased to see that the responsible person of the relevant department of the Supreme People's Court also made it clear in response to a reporter's question that "the two are complementary and mutually reinforcing, and it is not necessary to use the library as a substitute for the network and open the other door to the other."
Judicial openness is a basic principle of China's judicial system, and the online disclosure of judgment documents makes judicial openness "within reach" of the public, so that judicial fairness can be realized in a way that is visible to the people. I believe that China's efforts to promote judicial openness will only accelerate and will not stop. With the continuous optimization of the working mechanism for online judgment documents and the continuous advancement of the construction of the people's court's case database, China's judicial openness will usher in a new stage, and the judgment documents and the cases in the database will promote each other and show their talents.
*: People's Court News Media Headquarters.
Author: Chen Weidong Professor and doctoral supervisor of the Law School of Chinese University, executive vice president of the China Criminal Procedure Law Research Association.
Editor: Xing Tianran.