What Is an Open-Label Trial?

The open trial system refers to a system in which the people's courts should make public to the society in accordance with the law in addition to the collegial panel's evaluation of the case. The open trial system is a reflection of the value of the people in litigation, which is conducive to promoting and guaranteeing judicial justice and enhancing the credibility of judicial decisions. There are three exceptions to the public trial system: 1. Cases involving state secrets; 2. Cases involving personal privacy; 3. Divorce cases and cases involving trade secrets, where the parties apply for a non-trial. ^[1]

Open trial system

The open trial system refers to a system in which the people's courts should make public to the society in accordance with the law in addition to the collegial panel's evaluation of the case. The open trial system is a reflection of the value of the people in litigation, which is conducive to promoting and guaranteeing judicial justice and enhancing the credibility of judicial decisions. There are three exceptions to the public trial system: 1. Cases involving state secrets; 2. Cases involving personal privacy; 3. Divorce cases and cases involving trade secrets, where the parties apply for a non-trial. ^[1]

The open trial system refers to the system in which the court's trial process and judgment results of civil cases are disclosed to the public and the society. It means that in accordance with the law, except for cases that are not open and can be closed, all trials will be conducted in accordance with the law. At the same time, no matter whether the trial is open or not, the judgment will be conducted in public. Public trials are relative to secret trials. Public trials replaced secret trials as a manifestation of the civilized progress of the litigation system. In feudal and authoritarian societies, trials are often conducted in secret, and the trial process is not only unfair to the public, but even the parties are isolated from each other. The irrationality of secret trials was severely criticized by progressive thinkers during the bourgeois revolution. With the victory of the bourgeois revolution, the public trial system has gradually become an important litigation system in modern countries.

"The trial should be made public, and the evidence of the crime should be made public, so that public opinion, which may be the only means of restraint in society, can restrain power and desire

In China, the legal basis for the implementation of open trial systems at people's courts at all levels is:

(1) Article 125 of the Constitution of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the trials of cases by the people's courts shall be conducted in public except for special circumstances provided for by law. The defendant has the right to a defence. (2) Article 10 of the "Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" adopted at the Fourth Session of the Seventh National People's Congress on April 9, 1991 stipulates that: when a civil court hears a civil case, it shall discuss, evade, and make public in accordance with the law. Trial and final trial system.

(3) Article 6 of the "Administrative Procedural Law of the People's Republic of China" adopted at the Second Session of the Seventh National People's Congress on April 4, 1989 stipulates that: when a people's court hears administrative cases, it shall conduct meetings, evasion, public trials, and Two-trial final trial system.

(4) Article 11 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that trials of people's courts shall be conducted in public unless otherwise provided in this Law. The defendant has the right to a defence, and the people's court has an obligation to ensure that the defendant is defended.

(5) The Supreme People's Court's "Several Provisions on the Strict Implementation of the Public Trial System" strictly regulates the scope of public trial cases. Except for cases involving state secrets, personal privacy, and juvenile delinquency, cases involving divorce or cases involving commercial secrets decided by the people's court, the people's court, and other cases involving closed secrets as provided by law, and other cases of first instance Publicly in accordance with the law. In the case of the first trial that is open to trial, if the parties file an appeal or the procuratorial organ protests, the second trial should also be conducted publicly in accordance with the law, in addition to the retrial and the fact that the facts can be judged by law.

In general, the significance of implementing the public trial system in trial work is mainly reflected in the following aspects:

First, public trials are the guarantee of fairness. Because the rules of the law on public trials have not been strictly followed, not only has the fair procedure not been achieved, but also because the trials are not implemented, many cases have adopted the method of black box operation, and trials lack due supervision. As a result, judicial corruption has spread and developed. It can be said that the corruption of referee law is largely caused by the failure to strictly observe the statutory public trial system. At present, in the reform of trial methods, the implementation of the public trial system is not so much the reform of the original trial method through public trials. It changed the "hidden box operation" to open to the society, allowing judges to conduct trials and adjudications in the public eye, blocked various channels of private law and corruption, cut off the abnormal channels of communication between judges and parties, and greatly benefited the people. Mass supervision of the court.

Second, the implementation of the open trial system is an important measure to achieve procedural justice. Public trials are not only statutory due process, but also closely linked to other statutory procedures. For example, the openness of the procedure, the parties to a judge who require a public trial of a case should have the right to request a withdrawal from the trial judge in accordance with the law, and the parties are in court

From the perspective of the implementation of China's public trial system, the following problems exist: First, the lack of substantive disclosure makes public trials superficial. The public hearing requires the court to conduct substantive trial activities of the case, that is, the use of case evidence, the determination of facts, and the judgment of the non-responsibility of the parties should be conducted in an open court. Only by passing the trial in the court can a judge form an understanding of the case. , To make a referee, to make the winning party win in a dignified manner, the losing party clearly lost, the listeners listened clearly. In judicial practice, there is a general tendency for formalization of public trials, which are prominently manifested as follows: 1. The trial is decided first and the trial is followed. Although with the continuous advancement of the reform of civil trial methods, the situation of judges' "big bag" has changed, but in general, the people's courts are still too proactive when exercising their powers in the litigation process. Before the trial began, the judge intervened too much in the litigation. Through the investigation of the evidence and the questioning of the parties involved, in fact, the substantive trial of the case has begun, and the judgement opinions have also been formed, making the public trial just go through the court. That's it; 2. Trial and judgment are separated. That is, no trial or no trial. The trial committee is the supreme authority in the court. The vast majority of cases can only be finalized after being discussed by the trial committee, and the collegiate bench must implement them. In fact, the Trial Committee is deciding, and the "host" generally reports the case, such as the facts of the parties' disputes, the respective evidence and reasons of the two parties, the collegiate panel's determination of the evidence and facts, the applicable laws and the final opinion. The members of the trial committee each expressed their opinions based on the reported situation, and finally a minority submitted to the majority to make a resolution. This is actually in

In the reform of trial methods, the implementation of the open trial system should be taken as an important criterion for measuring whether strict law enforcement is implemented, and it should be completed as the most important task. Any implementation of public trials indicates that the court has truly enforced the law. Any failure to pay attention to public trials or restrict public hearings as much as possible despite the use of public trials or still use the method of pre-trial and post-trial indicates that the court has not really done so. Strict law enforcement also makes it difficult to convince people that their judicial trials are fair. The current trial disclosure system is actually just a formal disclosure. Many existing systems and regulations restrict the extent and scope of trial disclosure. Trial disclosure should be a thorough disclosure, a substantial disclosure. On how to better realize the openness of trials, the following points should be noted:

Provide guarantees to the public during the trial process

Only the court attaches importance to this work, it should be said that it is easy to do. In the courtroom, buying an automatic water dispenser or buying some mineral water before the courtroom; preparing enough seats for the public to listen to; providing working meals for the people who are hearing, etc., are all material for the public in the court The hearing of the trial process provided the best guarantee.

Efforts to improve the quality of judges

Judges are at the core of the judicial system, and they play a decision-making role in the judicial process; therefore, the requirements for the quality of judges' personnel should be higher than the requirements for talented law enforcement officers in other divisions. In judicial practice, due to the lack of quality of judges, the open trial system is eroded, which ultimately leads to judicial corruption and judicial injustice. The trial team in China continues to grow, and the quality of judges has also improved. Many graduates of political and legal institutions have become a new force to enrich the judicial team, but overall, the quality of judges is still not high enough. Therefore, the quality of judges needs to be improved. On the one hand, it is necessary for the hegemon to get started. A strict judge examination system should be established. The reference staff must have a legal professional outfit that can be diploma or other professional undergraduate diplomas to participate in the examination. Judges; on the other hand, the education and training of judges should be strengthened so that judges develop good professional behaviors.

Whether the trial is public or not is an important sign of a country's democracy and the soundness of the legal system. In fact, it is an integral part of the modern litigation structure. The ultimate purpose of implementing public trials is to realize the fairness of judgment conclusions, expose trial activities to the society, and enable the public to make social evaluations of trials in accordance with the consensus of social morality, and then allow judges to have a professional moral self-restraint Mechanism to maximize the fairness of trial results. In order to reflect the requirements of judicial openness and transparency, we should start from the many flaws in the reform and improvement of the mechanism and build an advanced and democratic system to ensure the thorough and substantive disclosure of trials.

Promote independent trial system for judges

The so-called independent trial, as far as the court is concerned, the trial organization system requires the collegiate bench (or sole judge) to make a judgment within the scope of its competence without the review and approval of other judges. Domination should not be exercised, that is, there is no "judge above judge". Thus, the independent trial system includes the "independence" of trials and judges. In terms of reality, both meanings of independent trials should be emphasized.

Improve public judgment system

In addition to the current practice of public sentencing: publicly sentencing should detail the reasons for the sentencing, or make a written document for the parties and the public to read.

Improving the working conditions of the people's courts

Broaden the channels for open trials. On the one hand, it is necessary to strengthen the material construction of the People's Court, improve working conditions and working conditions, and strive to create good conditions for the full implementation of public trials. Various forms such as opinions or scoring surveys were held to broaden the trial's openness to the society and accept public supervision.

The open trial system is a judicial and democratic system that enables the people to understand the judicial process, supervises judicial activities, promotes the democratization and fairness of justice, and promotes the process of legalization of the state and society. In the current vigorous judicial reform activities, only if the requirements of several aspects are truly fulfilled can the public trial system be implemented, thereby ensuring the openness and transparency of the trial, and at the same time, it can also urge the judges to be fair Handle cases, improve quality, seriously accept public supervision, and further improve the status of the people's courts in the eyes of the masses.