The Second Intermediate Court of Dongguan in South China's Guangdong Province
has reduced more than 30 criminals' sentences and commuted the capital
punishment of many to life sentence in exchange for cash.
The criminals are offered the choice with the consent of the victims'
families, who are paid the money as compensation.
Defending the move, the Dongguan court's deputy director Chen Si showed a
letter of thanks from a victim's family who had consented to commuting the death
sentence of the guilty to life
imprisonment if they were paid 50,000 yuan ($6,400) as
compensation.
"The court, after serious consideration, decided to reduce his sentence
within the provisions of law," he said. "And the money helped the family of the
victim out of abject poverty."
To be honest, Dongguan Second Intermediate Court didn't pioneer the
cash-for-amnesty move, professor of Political Science and Law in Beijing's China
University Hong Daode said.
A Supreme People's Court regulation issued in late 2000 stipulated that
courts could consider the compensation if defendants were ready to pay the
victims or their families while handing down sentences.
"Strictly based on the law, the Supreme Court took a great step forward in
putting judicial explanation into practice." Hong said.
China's famed law expert He Jiahong corroborated Hong, and said: "In essence,
the law punishes the crime rather than the criminal. And the guiding principle
of China's criminal law requires extreme caution while passing the death
penalty."
The Supreme Court took back the right of final review of a death sentence
from the provincial courts from January 1 to tighten control over handing down
capital punishment.
But commuting the death penalty after a defendant pays compensation to the
victim's family does not tantamount to "redeeming crime with money", he said.
"The money can help the family, especially if it's poor, and more
importantly, only after its consent can the sentence be lightened, he said.
But, many disagree with the law experts. An online writer calling himself
"Rule of Law" termed it a "hard sell" on Sina.com, one of China's major news
portals.
"Why not have a second opinion on the so-called consent," wrote "Rule of
Law." "The poor sufferers have no option but to accept the money. They are, to
some extent 'coerced' into compromise."
Liu Xiao, a third-year law student in Renmin University of China, appealed to
the judiciary on "behalf of all the victims" to set up a "sufferer-compensation
system" to enable victims' families, especially the very poor ones, to take the
right decision in a case.
