Abstract:The primary subject of the sentencing procedural reform is to establish an appropriate sentencing procedural model to coordinate the relationship between conviction and sentencing proceedings reasonably. Although the newly established reform program by the Supreme People's Court can be feasibly implemented in the guilty plea cases, it would meet some difficulties in both summary cases and general procedures and even face some theoretical disputes and real risks. Through the experimental exploration of the grassroots courts, a model named "centralized sentencing model", basing on the mass—appearance of prosecutors, has gradually taken shape in summary proceedings. In this model, after the indictment which confirms the defendant has constituted a crime, the court hears a number of cases prosecuted by prosecutors in a continuous sentencing hearing and gives their sentencing decisions respectively. In cases where the defendant pleas not guilty, the viewpoints for the establishment of an "independent sentencing procedure" are came out and supported by some law experts and the judiciary. This model means that the court trial shall be divided into two relatively independent stages, that is, conviction and the sentencing hearing. The court should firstly settle down whether the accused has constituted a crime or not through investigation and court debates. After the declaration of conviction, the court will organize a special sentencing proceeding. By listening to the views of both defense lawyers and prosecutors and reviewing the statutory and discretionary sentencing circumstances, the court then makes the final decisions on the sentencing issue of the accused. In cases where the defendant voluntarily pleas guilty, the "flexible alternating sentencing model" still leaves some spaces for further improvement. So the sentencing procedural reform is far from maturity. The policy—makers of the reform should not be complacent and conservative. For these self—engendered reform experiences, the reformers should not blindly adopt the attitude of rejection, but instead should face up to the reasonableness of their existence and assess their effectiveness, so as to make them play a greater role in the formation of a new system.

My Views on Reforming the System of Public Prosecution Censorship

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

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

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

District Circuit Court: An Approach of Realism——An Analysis Based on Death Penalty Review Process

On Coping Mechanisms of Procuratorate for the Public Opinion-Related Cases

A Comparative Study of the Application of the Doctrine of Prosecuting Discretion in Japan,Germany and China

A Tentative Exploration into the Feasibility of Administration of Justice's Interference with Domestic Violence

Chief Prosecutor System --another Commentary on Judicial Independence

On Objective Responsibility of Prosecutors

Several Issues on the Reform of Criminal Procedure

Retrospection and Reflection on the Criminal Judicial Reform in Recent Years

Several Ideas concerning the Reform of the Supervision of Legal Proceedings

Optimization of Judicial Review System in Non-Prosecution for Corporate Compliance

To Provide for New Rights or To Strengthen Remedies?

Reflections on Issues Concerning the Basic Principles of the Civil Procedural Law

Some Thoughts about the Reform of Criminal Justice System

Models of Sentencing Procedural Reform

Comparison of the Principles of Prosecution and Prosecution Suspension between Germany and Japan

Views on Conducting Civil Proceedings by Procuratorial Institutions

Re-Classification and Theoretical Study of the Civil Prosecutorial Suggestions