Abstract:Based on data collected from China Law Year Book and practice in one district in east of China from 1997 to 2007,this paper conducts an empirical study on the operation of current Chinese Criminal Procedural Law.Although there are some variations,the data from the district demonstrates all the characteristics demonstrated by China Law Year Book,that is,very low rate of non—prosecution and non— guilty decision,low percentage of defendant appeal and high rate of affirmation of original judgment in second instance trial and trial supervision procedure,which strengthens the conclusion that Chinese criminal process is decided by criminal investigation. A process decided by investigation procedure means once a case is transferred by the investigative organ to be reviewed and prosecuted,it is very likely to be convicted.Most of the first instance trial just reviews and verifies the evidence collected in the investigation procedure.Such process is different from the "trial—center" criminal procedure of western countries.Such process has some advantages,such as encouraging investigative organs to find out the truth of the case by all means and to screen out most of the suspects in the early stage of criminal process to save procedural resources and make suspects get rid of criminal proceedings earlier.However,it does have some disadvantages.It makes investigative organs under great pressures to collect guilty evidence, which would infringe the human rights of the suspects.Moreover,it also makes the public trial a "rubber stamp" to the investigation procedure and cannot revise errors made in investigation. Current judicial reform chooses trail procedure as the breakthrough,and the investigation procedure seems quiet by comparison.This approach of reform is wrong.To be successful in criminal judicial reform,we must start from investigation procedure.The reform of investigation procedure is too ambitious a topic for this paper to look into.But the decision made by the investigative organ at the end of the investigation is the turning point of criminal proceeding.Establishing effective supervision of this turning point is the key to Chinese criminal process.

Readjustment to the Norms of the Grounds for Retrial

Public Opinions on Criminal Trials in China: A Comparative Study of Chinese College Students in the PRC and Hong Kong

Rethinking on Elements of Cause of Retrial

From Special Mitigation to Unconstitutional Censorship: Taking Xu Ting Case as an Example

Public Cases, Authentication Opinions, and Amendments to Law of Criminal Procedure

Research on the Online Live Broadcasts of Criminal Trial: An Empirical Analysis Based on Questionnaire Survey

Retrospection and Reflection on the Criminal Judicial Reform in Recent Years

Dislocation and Rectification: Reflection on System of Adjudicatory Supervision

Transforming the Evaluation of the Rule of Law in China

Improving the Full Review of the Criminal Trial of Second Instance

Rethinking "Retrial Litigation":From the Perspective of Solving the Problem of "Difficulty of Complaints"

Several Issues on the Reform of Criminal Procedure

Discussion on the Application and Improvement of Criminal Trial by Default in China

Reconsideration of "Ma Xi-wu-Styled Trial"

Simplified Trial:Challenges and Responses in the Reform Process

On the Procedural Designing of Review Mechanism on Civil Trials

On the Retrials Presented by the Public Right in Civil Actions

An Empirical Study on Operation of Chinese Criminal Procedure Law

Some Interrelations on Re-amendment of Criminal Procedure Law

To Provide for New Rights or To Strengthen Remedies?

Recursivity in Legal Change: Lawyers and Reforms of China's Criminal Procedure Law