Basic Principles of Law and the Sentencing Decisions of Ordinary Citizens：The Evidence f rom the Experiment
Weiwei LI,Qun YANG,Qinglin ZHANG,Jianmin ZENG
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-232X.2014.03.005
2014-01-01
Abstract:Presumption of innocence and the principle that all people are equal before the law are the basic principles of law which should be obeyed by judges in Chinese judicial process .To investigate whether the natural justice view of ordinary citizens is consistent with these two principles of law ,the present study employs 198 college students without professional law education or training background and asks them to make a legal decision for a suspect in an intentional homicide crime . The results show that when solid evidence is obtained ,the suspect is judged to receive much longer prison sentence than no sufficient evidence is obtained ,it means the natural justice view is consistent with the basic principles of law .When some strong but not conclusive evidence is presented ,the suspect is judged to have longer prison sentence than when no evidence is present ,w hich violates the principle of in dubio pro reo .When the suspect is the son of a government officer ,the suspect is judged to receive longer prison sentence than when the suspect is a peasant ,which violates the principle that all people are equal before the law .However ,different identities of different victims have no significant effect on sentencing .Therefore , the legal justice view of ordinary people ,which has certain subjectivity and deviation with the two basic principles of law ,is easy to be affected by emotion and moral concepts ,and represents the characteristic of bounded rationality .