Though legal TV shows may cause you to think that only a small portion of criminals receive the death sentence, this number is much higher in China and other countries that still practice the death penalty. Currently in China, there are 46 types of crimes for which an individual can receive the death penalty. Even though the number of people on death row and the number actually being executed are kept as state secrets, according to Cornell’s Death Penalty Worldwide, the estimate of the number of people on death row in China is about thousands a year: this is more than the sum of the number of people on death row of the rest of the countries in the world. Many causes bring the constant high number of people on death row, including the fact that China holds different trial procedures than most other countries. Therefore, considering more factors in the process of determining the death penalty sentence would greatly decrease the number of people on death row in China.
Firstly, the presence of the jury in the Chinese court could help judges make more just decisions. Currently in China, the judge has sole responsibility for the outcome of each court case, rather than both the jury and the judge, as is customary in most Western countries. In many cases, those serving on the jury are relatively just and have not experienced events similar to those of the case; this allows them to make subjective conclusions. In contrast, when only one judge decides the fate of a case, it is possible for the judge’s personal perspective to factor too heavily into the decision making process, which means convictions can vary greatly depending on a judge’s biases. Once, I heard from my teacher that they were going to serve as a juror in a case relating to a teenage girl’s sexual abuse. They ultimately did not serve on the jury, however, because of their job as an educator at an all-girls high school. Indeed, factors such as occupation, family background and personal experience can affect one’s judgement: having just one potentially biased judge decide the outcome of a case can lead to unjust decisions. This does not mean that misjudgment occurs consistently, but nevertheless, China’s lack of juries in trials likely slightly increases the number of people on death row.
Additionally, precedents should be taken into consideration when deciding on the outcome of a case. Currently in China, penalties are decided upon solely on the basis of legislation without any consideration of precedents. In contrast, in the American legal system, taking precedents from previous cases into account is a necessary step when making court decisions. In other words, a court decision needs to have practicality for making decisions for other cases. Contrary to America’s precedent system, China’s law articles are the only element that influence the decision of what punishment a criminal receives. For example, if an article states that stealing an object over ten thousand RMB brings one year of imprisonment, this exact punishment is applied to anyone who steals this amount. Even if, in a previous case, a person receives one year of imprisonment for stealing twenty thousand RMB, a person who steals ten thousand RMB will still be subject to one year in prison. If a law states that murdering another person leads to the death penalty, someone who commits murder will receive this penalty even if a previous murderer received just ten years in prison. Strict rules do intimidate people and prevent them from committing crimes, but it becomes unfair when these rules are the only documents being reviewed in court cases. Thus, considering more precedents in court decisions can also decrease the number of people sent to death row.
In conclusion, even though China has a great number of people on death row and people who receive the death penalty, there are factors that can be changed in the decision-making process in order to reasonably decrease this number.
