Judicial Reform Needs Ten Types of Awareness (Part II)
　　5. The Awareness of the present

　　Judicial reform is a long term progressing and deepening process, which takes on the characteristic of many phases. As the saying goes “Good governance can adjust and act in a timely manner”, judicial reform should have a sense of the present, keep up with the times and take place in appropriate timing. First, judicial reform should be based on current national conditions. Current national conditions have many multi-dimensional aspects, which involve the condition of the party, society, people as well as the status of politics, economy, culture, law, social development and etc. Compared with traditional national conditions, current national conditions more directly determine the basic attributes of the judicial systems of our country, its overall framework, trend of development and outline; furthermore, it could constrain the development and implementation of reform scheme at the present stage. Take for instance, the political conditions and realities of our country, namely, form of state people’s democratic dictatorship, form of government the system of people's congress and leadership the People’s Republic of China, have determined that the reform of political system shall not be carried out in five aspects. Correspondingly, judicial reform in China cannot imitate or copy the judicial system or model based on the “Separation of three powers” in the West. Second, before launching judicial reform, one should do an in-depth research of the present internal and external environment and status of the court. External environment includes rule of law, economy, society, politics, culture and other aspects outside the judicial system, moreover, the relationship between the court and the procuratorate, judicial administrative organ and public security organs. It produces an impact on the implementation, effect and time of specific reform measures; therefore, scientific and feasible method should be adopted to make practical judgment and evaluation. For example, the World Justice Project recommended the Rule of Law Index to evaluate the status of rule of law in a state. This index is composed of four groups, totally 16 level 1 indexes and 68 level 2 indexes. The first group emphasizes the constitutionalization and institutionalization of rule of law, to ensure the executive power been restrained. Second group emphasized that the rule of law is established based on a just, open and stable legislative system. Third group prioritizes that the rule of law should be open, fair and efficient in judicial process. Fourth group highlights that rule of law should be supported by a group of independent, capable and virtuous legal professionals. Internal environment of the court refers to judge, work staff, cases, judicial administrative facilities, judicial concept and model, operation of judicial right, trial management, organization, function and others. In other words, only when one have a thorough research on the background, could he be able to propose a practical and realistic reform scheme. What’s more, judicial reform should focus on solving the prominent issues at present. Judicial reform does not aim for reform only; rather it should keep the right stance, meeting people’s demand first. As the saying goes “apply medicine according to indications”, it should focus on solving the issues concerning people’s dissatisfaction, expectations, and judicial issues regarding the systematic, institutional and supportive aspect of the people’s court, which hinders the court from serving the scientific development and the scientific development of the court, so it can promote the court to develop soundly and in an all-round way, improve the judicial capability of the court on serving the party and the state, bring real benefits and fruits of judicial reform to the general public. Lastly, judicial reform should be conducted based on the current status and timely adjust the concept or measures of reform. Reform is never smooth and it often experiences repetition and setbacks. The reform of judicial system and working mechanism in China, in particular, has no fixed model to imitate, like the overall national reform. Timely adjustment or even necessary give-ups are sometimes needed. For instance, weight adjustment between the two dispute-solving pattern mediation and trial are necessary to adapt to the different features of the disputes in different times. The system of chief judge and law clerk are shelved in some regions because the objective conditions are not ripe yet, etc. National judicial test policies are adapted to mitigate the inadequate judge issue in western China. Judicial reform must be correspondent with the current status and environment, and then it would be vibrant and effective. Therefore, the reform feel the pulse of the times and situations and have a thorough understanding of the reality and problems. Before the reform, we should figure out what should be stuck to and institutionalized, what should be adjusted or even abandoned, what could be evolved into new reform measures, enriched or supplemented.

　　6. The Awareness of goal

　　Whether it be political party, group or individual, it maintains the stance that “Human beings are rational animal” and every act it performs is obviously or hiddenly guided by a specific goal, “preparedness ensures success and unpreparedness spells failure”, many framework documents in foreign countries always pointed out specific reform goals, such as the “Mongolia Judicial Reform’s Strategic Arrangement” issued by Great Hural of Mongolia in 2000, which is a long term strategic documents on judicial reform. It expounds the direction for the development of the judicial system in the overall judicial reform framework of Mongolia and establishes the strategic goal of Mongolia judicial system. (1) ensure the independent political, economical and social status of the court and judges and establish a corresponding judge accountability system; (2) improve the adaptability of judicial systems to meet the demand social change; (3) strive for judicial justice through appropriate application of law;(4) improve the service capacity of the court to ensure that the court respond to the request of the client in a timely manner; (5) strengthen the professional development of the ordinary courts and special courts, establish efficient proceedings. Central Committee Political Bureau of Vietnam Communist Party released “2005-2020 judicial reform strategy” on June 2, 2005 (No.49th -NQ/TW judicial reform strategy resolution), which establishes the goal of judicial reform is “to establish a clean, healthy, authoritative, democratic, rigorous, fair and just judiciary, to ensure that the judiciary develop steadily towards modernization and that the trial-centered judicial activities actively serve Vietnam socialist country and its people”.

　　Although the reform of our country pursued a “steady” and “pragmatic” strategy, but the economic reform goal is clear at every stage, for example, the 13th CPC National Congress proposed “a planned commodity economy”, 14th Party Congress “socialist market economy” (of course, during the period, there is some disagreement and disputes). However, as for the purpose of the reform of the judicial system in China, the CPC Central Committee still has not pointed out a clear programmatic and directional objectives which is summarized similarly.(Of course, there is no specialized topic in this field on the CPC Central Committee plenary session), but only made arrangements for the different stages of the judicial reform, for example, as stated in the report of the 15th CPC National Congress, “to promote judicial reform, institutionally ensure that the judiciary exercise judicial and procuratorial power according to the law independently and impartially, establish accountability system for unjust and misjudged cases; to strengthen law enforcement and development of the judicial team.” The 16th CPC National Congress report says, “to promote the reform of the judicial system. Socialist judicial system must guarantee fairness and justice in the whole society. In accordance with the requirements of justice and strict law enforcement, the systems should be improved in terms of the organization of judicial organs, division of responsibility and power as well as management. It should enjoy clear responsibilities, cooperate with each other, mutually restrain and operate efficiently. Judicial and prosecutorial agencies should be ensured institutionally that they would exercise judicial and procuratorial power by law independently and impartially. We should improve judicial proceedings, protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens and legal persons, effectively solve and implement difficult issues. The working mechanism of judicial organs and personal property management system should be reformed to progressively realize the separation of judgment and the prosecution with judicial administrative affairs. Also, we need to strengthen the supervision of judicial work, punish corruption in the judicial field and develop a group of firm, proficient, virtuous and impartial judicial personnel.” 17th CPC National Congress report states “deepen the reform of the judicial system, optimize the allocation of judicial functions and powers, standardize judicial practices, and build a fair, efficient and authoritative socialist judicial system to ensure that the judicial and procuratorial organs exercise judicial power by the law independently and impartially” Academic sector’s understanding on this is not consistent. There are theory of “justice and efficiency”, “the independence of the judiciary” and “fair, efficient and authoritative”.