Judicial Ethics and the Judicial Accountability System in China: Institutional Foundations and Coordinated Construction

Zeran Shen

doi:10.54691/9r4hj983

Authors

Zeran Shen School of Law, Anhui University of Finance & Economics, Bengbu, Anhui 233030, China

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/9r4hj983

Keywords:

Judicial Ethics; Judicial Accountability System; Judge Quota System; Judicial Independence; Professional Safeguards for Judges.

Abstract

Judicial ethics refers to the professional norms that judges should observe in performing adjudicative functions and safeguarding judicial justice. Its realization cannot rely solely on judges’ personal self-discipline, but requires institutional support. Against the background of China’s judicial system reform, this paper analyzes the judge quota system, the judicial accountability system, the centralized management of personnel, financial and material resources of local courts below the provincial level, and professional safeguards for judges. Together, these systems provide the personnel, responsibility, independence, and support structures for judicial ethics. The institutional construction of judicial ethics in China still requires further improvement in the dynamic adjustment of judge quotas, the boundaries of judicial accountability, the centralized management mechanism, and the professional safeguard system for judges. These improvements can help transform ethical requirements such as impartiality, independence, accountability, and integrity into stable mechanisms of judicial practice, thereby enhancing judicial credibility and advancing the rule of law.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Supreme People’s Court. (2019). Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Issuing the Opinions on Deepening the Comprehensive Supporting Reform of the Judicial System of the People’s Courts: the Fifth Five-Year Reform Program of the People’s Courts (2019–2023). Gazette of the Supreme People’s Court, (08), 6–17.

[2] Supreme People’s Court. (2019). Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Issuing the Implementation Opinions on Further Fully Implementing the Judicial Accountability System. Gazette of the Supreme People’s Court, (02), 25–29.

[3] Supreme People’s Court. (2020). Notice of the Supreme People’s Court on Issuing the Guiding Opinions on the Dynamic Adjustment of the Judge Quota of People’s Courts below the Provincial Level (for Trial Implementation). Gazette of the Supreme People’s Court, (06), 24–25.

[4] Qian, D. J., & Guo, J. G. (2021). An analysis of the functional realization of the judge quota system. Jilin University Journal Social Sciences Edition, 61(02), 76–83, 236.

[5] Pan, M. F., & Li, Q. W. (2018). On the institutional construction of the judge quota system. Law Science Magazine, 39(01), 117–123.

[6] Zhang, Z. H. (2018). On the comprehensive supporting reform of the judicial responsibility system. China Legal Science, (02), 56–74.

[7] Zhang, Q. (2019). Case pressure and its responses in primary-level justice after the reform of the judge quota system: taking three typical primary courts in Y Province as examples. China University of Political Science and Law Journal, (01), 96–108, 208.

[8] Chen, R. H. (2018). Theoretical reflections on the reform of the judge quota system. The Jurist, (03), 1–14, 191.

[9] Zhou, C. J. (2016). Judge accountability in the reform of the judicial responsibility system: comments on the Opinions on Improving the Judicial Responsibility System in People’s Courts. The Jurist, (03), 94–104, 178.

[10] Chen, G. Z., & Wang, Y. L. (2016). Several issues concerning the judicial responsibility system. China University of Political Science and Law Journal, (02), 31–41, 158–159.