107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

THE POSITION AND ROLE OF CHINESE PROCURATORIAL
ORGANS IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Guan Fujin*
I. PEOPLE’S PROCURATORATESARE STATE ORGANS FOR LEGALSUPERVISION AND EXERCISEPROCURATORIAL POWER
INDEPENDENTLY
Article 129 of the Constitution of thePeople’s Republic of China and Article 1 oft h e O r g a n i c L a w o f t h e P e o p l e ’s
Procuratorates of the People’s Republic ofChina stipulate that “the people’s
procuratorates of the People’s Republic ofChina are state organs for legal
supervision.” According to the law, thestate makes it clear that people’s
procuratorates are state organs for legal
supervision and exercise the right of legal
supervision on behalf of the state. This is
the legal position of the Chinese
procuratorial organs.
The Chinese procuratorial organs shall
exercise procuratorial power independently
and shall not be subject to interference.
Procuratorial organs perform theirfunctions and powers independently
according to the law. This is the mostimportant principle for legal supervision
defined by the Constitution of the People’s
Republic of China. Article 131 of theConstitution of the People’s Republic ofChina clearly stipulates that “people’s
procuratorates shall, in accordance withthe law, exercise procuratorial power
independently and are not subject tointerference by administrative organs,public organizations or individuals.” The
Criminal Procedure Law and the Organic* Deputy Director of Department, General Bureauof Anti-Corruption and Bribery, Supreme People’s
Procuratorate, China.

Law of the People’s Procuratorates of thePeople’s Republic of China also have thesame provisions. We can understand thisprinciple in four aspects. First,
procuratorial power is a state power
exclusively exercised by procuratorialorgans, and no administrative organs,public organizations and individuals havethe right to exercise it. This is therequirement set by the particularity andseriousness of procuratorial power. Neitherorgans, public organizations andindividuals which are not state organs nor
state organs which are not procuratorialorgans have the right to exercise
procuratorial power. Second, when
procuratorial organs exercise procuratorial
power, they only obey the Constitution andstate laws and are not subject tointerference by administrative organs,public organizations and individuals. In
practical procuratorial work, procuratorialorgans shall not be subject to interferenceby other administrative organs’
administrative orders which affect theexercise of procuratorial power and byother public organizations and someindividuals with special privileges. Thisis the key to ensuring the fair and effective
exercise of procuratorial power. Third,procuratorial organs must exercise
procuratorial power according to their legal
functions, powers and methods and cannot
abuse it. The criminal, civil andadministrative procedure laws and a series
of internal regulations on procuratorial
work formulated by the Supreme People’s
Procuratorate contain concrete provisions
on the procuratorial functions and powers
of procuratorial organs and the procedures
and methods for exercising legal

169

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
supervision. Violating these regulations
and abusing procuratorial power will
impair the socialist legal system, and legal
responsibility will be investigated andaffixed. Fourth, procuratorial organs
exercise procuratorial power
independently. This means that people’s
procuratorates at all levels exercise
procuratorial power independently. This
does not mean that chief procurators orother public procurators personallyexercise procuratorial power
independently. This shows that democratic
centralism is applied in exercising legal
supervision. This also ensures the correct
exercise of procuratorial power and avoids
the personal abuse of procuratorial power.
II. INVESTIGATING CRIMINALCASES PERPETRATED BY TAKINGADVANTAGE OF THE OFFICE IS AN
IMPORTANT DUTY OF
PROCURATORIAL ORGANS
The filing of criminal cases of corruption
and bribery perpetrated by taking
advantage of an office for purposes ofinvestigation and prosecution is a part of
all the rights enjoyed by the Chinese
procuratorial organs. Article 18 of the
Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s
Republic of China, currently in effect,
stipulates that “with regard to the crimeof corruption and bribery, the crime ofdereliction of duty committed by state
personnel, the crime of illegal detention,
extorting a confession by torture,
retaliation and framing and illegal search
to infringe on citizens’ right of the person
committed by state personnel who takeadvantage of their functions and powers
and the crime of infringement on citizens’
democratic rights, people’s procuratorates
shall file such criminal cases forinvestigation.”
According to the provisions of theConstitution of the People’s Republic ofChina and the Organic Law of the People’s

170

Procuratorates of the People’s Republic ofChina, statically the legal supervision
exercised by procuratorial organs is asystem under which people’s
procuratorates exercise procuratorial
supervision over the implementation andobservance of state laws, and dynamically
it is an activity in which people’s
procuratorates exercise procuratorial
supervision with a view to ensuring thecorrect implementation and strict
observance of state laws. The scope of legal
supervision are as follows:(1) Procuratorial organs exercise
supervision to determine whether
state organs and their personnel
correctly apply and enforce the laws;
and(2) Procuratorial organs exercise
supervision to determine whether
ordinary citizens abide by state laws.
The first is the major task of legal
supervision exercised by procuratorialorgans. Of course, procuratorial organs
exercise supervision over the crimecommitted by taking advantage of theoffice. Such supervision is an importantcomponent of legal supervision. There arethree reasons for this. First, when stateorgans apply and enforce the laws, in factstate personnel do this. In other words,
all activities to apply and enforce the laws
cannot be conducted without the personnel
in state organs.
Second, procuratorial organs exercise
supervision over the application andenforcement of the laws by state organs andtheir personnel with a view to discovering,
investigating and dealing with violationsof state laws in the process of applying andenforcing the laws. The activities to apply
and enforce the laws will be conducted
through the acts of state personnel.
Therefore, in investigating and dealing
with violations of the laws in the processof applying and enforcing the laws, we focus
on violations of state laws perpetrated by

107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS
state personnel in the process of applying
and enforcing the laws. Some of theviolations of the laws perpetrated by state
personnel are ordinary acts in violation of
the law, and some seriously impair theinterests of the state, the collective and thecitizens and constitute crime, that is, thecrime committed by taking advantage ofthe office. Therefore, when procuratorialorgans exercise supervision over theapplication and enforcement of the laws bystate organs and their personnel, of course
this supervision includes supervision overthe crime committed by taking advantageof the office.
Third, state personnel administer thestate and society on behalf of the masses
and should exercise management in strict
accordance with the law. However, somestate personnel do not strictly abide by andcarry out the Constitution and the laws in
the process of performing their official
duties, but wilfully violate the Constitution
and the laws. People’s procurorates
exercise legal supervision to ensure thecorrect implementation of state laws.
Therefore, people’s procuratorates must
control the crime committed by taking
advantage of the office, which is seriously
divorced from the legal system and rectify
violations of the law. Such crime causes
more serious harm to the correct
application and enforcement of state laws
than ordinary illegal acts perpetrated bytaking advantage of the office. Therefore,
supervision over the crime committed bytaking advantage of the office is more
important than supervision over ordinary
illegal acts occurring in the application andenforcement of laws.
Supervision over the crime committed bytaking advantage of the office is designed
to determine whether or not such crime
occurs, give proper punishment for it,
prevent and reduce it, and ensure thecorrect application and enforcement ofstate laws. People’s procuratorates
exercise supervision over such crime which

has occurred, which is a kind of subsequent
supervision. This feature of supervision
over the crime committed by taking
advantage of the office determines that
conducting investigation is the necessarymeans to supervise it.
First, we can discover the crimecommitted by taking advantage of the office
only through investigation. Clues to thecriminal cases perpetrated by taking
advantage of the office come from various
channels. However, clues only show thatthe criminal cases committed by taking
advantage of the office may have occurred,
but do not mean that they have occurred
and that the offenders and thecircumstances of such crimes are known tothe public. Only by investigation canpeople’s procuratorates finally determine
whether or not such crimes have occurred,
who the offenders are and what thecircumstances of crimes are. In this way,such crimes can be exposed promptly andcan be placed under the supervision of
procuratorial organs.
Second, only by investigation canpeople’s procuratorates discover anddetermine the crimes committed by taking
advantage of the office and transfer thecriminal cases perpetrated by taking
advantage of the office to the adjudicatoryorgans for trial, so that offenders will be
g i v e n d u e p u n i s h m e n t . P e o p l e ’s
procuratorates cannot clarify the facts ofthe crime committed by taking advantageof the office without investigation andconsequently cannot transfer the cases tothe courts for trial. Prosecution of thecrime committed by taking advantage ofthe office will become empty talk.
Third, supervision over the crimecommitted by taking advantage of the office
is different from legal supervision overother ordinary crimes. Legal supervision
over other ordinary crimes can be exercisedby means of arrest and prosecution, andspecial investigative organs (public
security organs) which conduct

171

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
investigation. However, public security
organs cannot first investigate the crimecommitted by state personnel by taking
advantage of the office and then transfering
the criminal cases to procuratorial organs
for handling. This is determined by thefollowing features of the crime committed
by taking advantage of the office:(1) The subject of the crime committed
by taking advantage of the office isstate personnel. Most of thepersonnel have some administrative
powers, and some are senior officials.
They have close social relations in
administrative organs, and they areprotected by other officials. The
organs for investigating their crimes
can only be special organs which are
not administrative organs. It would
be futile for public security organs,which are administrative organs, toinvestigate the crime committed bystate personnel who haveadministrative powers and takeadvantage of their office.
(2) Offenders have a high educational
level and professional knowledge,
make use of intelligence in criminal
activities and often take advantageof their legal capacities. Thesecriminal cases are more covert andcunning than other criminal cases.
(3) Unlike homicide, theft and otherordinary criminal cases, it is hard todifferentiate between guilt andinnocence concerning the crimecommitted by taking advantage of theoffice. Therefore, this sets highdemands on the knowledge about law
which the personnel for handlingcases must master. In our country
procuratorial organs, administrative
organs and adjudicatory organs areequally important. Procuratorialorgans exercise procuratorial power
independently. According to theprovisions of the Public Procurator
Law, public procurators must be

172

university graduates. Therefore, thepower to investigate the crime ofembezzlement and bribery
committed by taking advantage of theoffice can only be exercised by
procuratorial organs. Investigationof the criminal cases perpetrated bytaking advantage of the office is thenecessary means for procuratorialorgans to exercise supervision overthe such crime.
III. PROCURATORIAL ORGANSEXERCISE SUPERVISION OVER
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGSACCORDING TO THE LAW
In criminal proceedings, people’s
procuratorates are special organs for legal
supervision which perform the functions
and powers of legal supervision.
Exercising legal supervision todetermine whether litigation proceeds
impartially according to the law is the
special function and power entrusted to
procuratorial organs by the law. According
to the law, people’s procuratorates exercise
legal supervision over criminal proceedings
in such concrete ways as reviewing a caseto make a decision to approve arrest,
examining prosecution, and appearing incourt for public prosecution. In otherwords, people’s procuratorates successfully
exercise legal supervision by handlingcases. Handling cases is the most effectivemeans for procuratorial organs to exercise
legal supervision. Procuratorial organs’
functions and powers in litigation comefrom legal supervision, and legal
supervision is successfully exercised inlitigation.
A. Supervision over Filing Cases
The Criminal Procedure Law of thePeople’s Republic of China stipulates thatpeople’s procuratorates exercise
supervision over filing cases mainly in thefollowing two aspects:

107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS
1. Article 87 of the Criminal Procedure
L a w s t i p u l a t e s t h a t “ i f a p e o p l e ’s
procuratorate thinks that a public security
organ does not file a case for investigation
which should be filed for investigation or
if a victim thinks that a public security
organ does not file a case for investigation
which should be filed for investigation andp r e s e n t s t h e c a s e t o t h e p e o p l e ’s
procuratorate, the people’s procuratorate
should require that the public security
organ explain the reasons for not filing thecase. If the people’s procuratorate thinksthat the reasons for not filing the case givenby the public security organ are untenable,
the former should send a notice of filingthe case to the latter. After the public
security organ receives the notice, it should
file the case.”
From this regulation, we can know thefollowing things:(1) In exercising supervision over filingcases, people’s procuratorates should
focus on the cases which public
security organs should file forinvestigation, but do not file.
(2) A people’s procuratorate has the rightto require that a public security organ
explain the reasons for not filing acase.
(3) If the public security organ’s reasonsfor not filing the case are untenable,
the people’s procuratorate should
send a notice of filing the case to the
public security organ. The notice ismandatory, so the public security
organ must carry it out.
(4) After the public security organ
receives the notice, it must file thecase which should be filed. Thisshows that procuratorial organs
perform the function of prosecuting
crimes on behalf of the state. This isalso a necessary reflection of
procuratorial organs’ rights ofsupervision and public prosecution.
In applying this regulation, people’s
procuratorates should focus on thecases which public security organs do
not file for investigating and affixing
legal responsibility for crimes. Suchcases mainly come from those cases
which are discovered by people’s
procuratorates in the process ofreviewing cases to make decisions toapprove arrest and prosecution,
which are presented to people’s
procuratorates by victims and which
are entrusted or transferred by therelevant departments under special
circumstances.
2. Article 18 of the Criminal Procedure
Law stipulates that “when people’s
procuratorates need to directly handle
other major criminal cases perpetrated by
the personnel in state organs who takeadvantage of their functions and powers,
with the decision of people’s procuratorates
at and above the provincial level, people’s
procuratorates can file them forinvestigation and prosecution.”
These cases mainly have the following
three characteristics:(1) The subject of crime is personnel instate organs.
(2) These cases must be major cases
perpetrated by state personnel who
take advantage of their functions andpowers.
(3) The filing of these cases must be
specially examined and approved,that is, with the decision of people’s
procuratorates at and above theprovincial level. This regulation gives
people’s procuratorates the right tosupervise cases in the process of filingand conducting investigation, with aview to giving full play to people’s
procuratorates’ functions of legal
supervision, solving the problems of
not filing cases even if there are cases,
not investigating and affixing legal
responsibility for crimes andreplacing penalty with fines incriminal judicial practice and173

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
ensuring that the criminal
responsibility of all criminals isinvestigated and affixed. By doingso, people’s procuratorates exercise
the right of prosecution for somecases. This does not mean thatpeople’s procuratorates exclusively
exercise the right of investigation
enjoyed by other organs. People’s
procuratorates exercise supervision
with a view to tightening supervision
over law enforcement, promoting
strict law enforcement and ensuring
the unified and correct
implementation of state laws.
In light of judicial practice, such cases
mainly include the following:(1) Cases perpetrated by the personnel
in state organs which the relevantorgans do not file to investigate andaffix legal responsibility and which
the relevant organs still do not affix
even if people’s procuratorates send
notices of filing cases forinvestigation;(2) Cases in which fines replace penalty,
which are handled too leniently andin which the relevant organs still do
not rectify illegalities even if people’s
procuratorates urge the relevantorgans to rectify them;(3) Cases in which people do not reach aconsensus on whether these cases
constitute crimes and people’s
procuratorates think it necessary toinvestigate and affix legal
responsibility according to the law;(4) Cases involving several crimes, ofwhich some crimes fall under thejurisdiction of people’s
procuratorates, and others fall under
the jurisdiction of public security
organs or other departments, overwhich people’s procuratorates haveproper jurisdiction or which the latter
persist in not handling;

174(5) Cases in which there are disputes
over jurisdiction, or in which theorgans with the right of jurisdiction
refuse to investigate or do not file forinvestigation for a long time; and(6) Cases in which specific organizations
entrust the people’s procuratorates
directly to file for investigation andprosecution.
This last regulation is a flexible
regulation on people’s procuratorates’
direct filing of cases for investigation andprosecution. People’s procuratorates
should strictly carry out this regulation andcannot arbitrarily increase cases directly
handled by them. With regard to theordinary cases in which public security
organs should file for investigation, but do
not file, people’s procuratorates should
require that public security organs explain
the reasons for not filing them. If people’s
procuratorates think that the reasons for
not filing cases given by public security
organs are untenable, the former should
notify the latter of filing cases and thelatter should do so. In principle, public
security organs should file such cases forinvestigation. If public security organs giveup filed cases which indeed have great
impact, cause serious consequences andconform to this regulation, people’s
procuratorates can file them forinvestigation and prosecution according tothis regulation.
B. Supervision over Carrying out
Arrest Decisions
Article 68 of the Criminal Procedure Lawof the People’s Republic of China stipulates
that “after conducting a review of a casethat a public security organ has submitted
f o r a p p r o v a l o f a r r e s t , a p e o p l e ’s
procuratorate, according to the differing
circumstances, shall make a decision toapprove arrest or not to approve arrest.
The public security organ should
immediately carry out the decision to107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS
approve arrest and should promptly notify
the people’s procuratorate to explain thereasons for not approving arrest. If there
is a need to conduct supplementary
investigation, the people’s procuratorate
should notify the public security organ for
doing so.” Article 69 stipulates that “incases where the people’s procuratorate does
not approve the arrest, the public security
organ shall, immediately after receiving
the notice, release the detained person andshould promptly notify the people’s
procuratorate of the circumstances of therelease.” Article 73 stipulates that “if apeople’s court, a people’s procuratorate anda public security organ discover that
improper coercive measures are taken to
deal with a suspect or a defendant, theyshould promptly abandon or change them.
If a public security organ releases thearrestee or changes the arrest measures,it should notify the people’s procuratorate
which originally approved the arrest.”
According to these regulations, thep e o p l e ’s p r o c u r a t o r a t e s e x e r c i s esupervision over carrying out arrest
decisions in the following aspects:(1) P u b l i c s e c u r i t y o r g a n s m u s t
immediately carry out the decisions
to approve the arrest made bypeople’s procuratorates and should
promptly notify people’s
procuratorates of the circumstances
for carrying them out. The
circumstances for carrying out thesedecisions include whether or notoffenders have been seized andarrested, where they are detained,
and the explanation of the reasons for
failure to arrest offenders if they are
not seized.
(2) P u b l i c s e c u r i t y o r g a n s m u s t
immediately release detained
persons if procuratorial organs decide
not to approve arrest and should
promptly notify people’s
procuratorates of the circumstancesof the release, such as whether or notsuspect is released and such coercive
measures as allowing a suspect toobtain a guarantor and await trial outof custody and allowing him to live
at home under surveillance should betaken.
(3) If public security organs discover that
improper coercive arrest measures
have been taken to deal with suspects
and abandon and change coercivearrest measures, they should notify
the people’s procuratorates which
originally approved the arrest. If
people’s procuratorates hold different
views, they can urge public security
organs to rectify improper coercive
measures.
(a) Reviewing cases and making
decisions to approve arrest are thefunctions of procuratorial organs,and other organs cannot makesuch decisions arbitrarily;(b) The organs for executing arrest
must immediately carry out arrest
decisions; and(c) Efforts should be made to tighten
supervision over carrying out
arrest decisions.
The
circumstances for arrest, releasing
detained persons and changing
coercive measures should bereported
to people’s
procuratorates promptly.
After people’s procuratorates decide
whether or not to approve an arrest, theyshould pay great attention to tightening
supervision over the notices and activities
concerning public security organs’ carryingout arrest decisions, releasing arrested
suspects or changing coercive measures. If
p e o p l e ’s p r o c u r a t o r a t e s d i s c o v e rillegalities, they should request public
security organs to rectify them. If public
security organs improperly change arrest
measures and release arrested suspects, orafter people’s procuratorates urge public
security organs to rectify their mistakes

175

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
and public security organs do not do so,people’s procuratorates should make arrest
decisions and request public security
organs to carry them out.
C. Supervision over Investigation
People’s procuratorates exercise legal
supervision according to the law todetermine whether the criminal
investigation conducted by public security
organs is legal. They exercise supervision
throughout the process of investigation
conducted by public security organs,including collecting evidence and taking
coercive measures to arrest criminal
suspects. Such supervision seeks to
identify mainly the following:(a) Extorting a confession from a suspect
and inducement leading toconfession;(b) Obtaining testimony and collecting
evidence from victims and witnesses
through such illegal means as
physical punishment, threat andinducement;(c) Falsifying, concealing, destroying,changing and obliterating evidence;(d) Intentionally creating injustices;(e) Engaging in misconduct to seek
selfish ends, conniving with andharbouring offenders;(f) Taking advantage of the office to seek
illegal interests in the process ofinvestigation and preliminary trial;(g) Embezzling, misappropriating andchanging illegally acquired money
and goods and interest;(h) Taking, carrying out, changing andinvalidating measures andregulations in violation of the
Criminal Procedure Law;(i) Violating the regulations on the timelimit for handling cases; and(j) Perpetrating other acts in violationof the relevant provisions of the
Criminal Procedure Law.

176

People’s procuratorates exercise
supervision over investigation by reviewing
cases to make decisions to approve arrest
and examining prosecution. Meanwhile,
in participating in the investigation
conducted by public security organs,undertaking supplementary investigationof cases and handling offence-reporting andaccusations, people’s procuratorates candiscover illegal acts perpetrated by public
security organs in the process ofinvestigation. People’s procuratorates
should conscientiously examine theapplications for withdrawal of the
responsible persons in public security
organs and send personnel to participate
in discussions of major cases held by public
security organs, if necessary. If in
reviewing cases people’s procuratorates
think it necessary to conduct reinspection
and re-examination concerning theinspection and examination undertaken by
public security organs, they can requirethat public security organs conduct
reinspection and re-examination and canalso send procuratorial staff to participate
in reispection and re-examination. With
regard to the illegal acts which have been
discovered, people’s procuratorates canorally notify public security organs torectifying them or send the Notices ofRectifying Illegal Acts. If the circumstances
are serious and the cases constitute crimes,
people’s procuratorates should investigate
and affix criminal responsibility according
to the law.
D. Supervision over Adjudication
Article 169 of the Criminal Procedure
L a w s t i p u l a t e s t h a t “ i f p e o p l e ’s
procuratorates discover that people’s courts
violate the litigation procedure prescribedby the law in trying cases, they have theright to notify people’s courts of rectifying
the wrong acts.” We should understandthis regulation in two aspects.

107TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTS’ PAPERS
First, the legal supervision over thepeople’s courts’ trial of criminal cases andover court hearings exercised by people’s
procuratorates is the function and powerof people’s procuratorates, which function
as state organs for legal supervision.
People’s procuratorates should perform thisfunction and power, and public procurators
cannot simply exercise this function andpower personally. Therefore, people’s
procuratorates should exercise thissupervision according to some prescribed
procedures and request people’s courts torectify the wrong acts.
Second, in court hearings, people’s
procuratorates should supervise thepeople’s courts’ violation of the relevant
procedures prescribed by the Criminal
Procedure Law in trying cases. Whenpublic procurators discover that people’s
courts violate the litigation procedure
prescribed by the law in court hearing, theyshould promptly report this to theirprocuratorates and request people’s courts
to rectify mistakes in the name of people’s
procuratorates. People’s courts shoulda c c e p t t h e o p i n i o n s o f p e o p l e ’s
procuratorates, promptly rectify theirm i s t a k e s , a n d n o t i f y t h e p e o p l e ’s
procuratorates of the circumstances of therectification.
It should be pointed out that theprovisions of the law do not require thatp e o p l e ’s p r o c u r a t o r a t e s e x e r c i s esupervision over court hearings in written
form after the court adjourns. If a public
procurator who appears in court discovers
that the court hearing seriously violates thelitigation procedure prescribed by the law,in the court he can put forward his opinions
to the court. If the court does not accept
his opinions and the violation of thelitigation procedure prescribed by the law
may affect the fair trial, the public
procurator can request for the adjournmentof the hearing. After he reports this to thechief procurator (except for the case inwhich the chief procurator appears incourt), he can request the court to rectify
its mistakes in the name of the
procuratorate. Supervision over court
hearings is a component of the right of legal
supervision, that is, procuratorial power.
People’s procuratorates should exercise thisright, and individual public procurators
should exercise legal supervision according
to Article 6 of the Public Procurator Law.
Public procurators perform their duties,
thereby enabling people’s procuratorates toperform their functions and powers of legal
supervision. When public procurators
appear in court, people’s procuratorates
entrust the task of supervision over court
hearings to them. When public prosecutors
appear in court, they can put forward theiropinions about the violation of theprocedure prescribed by the Criminal
Procedure Law in the process of court
hearing. If a collegiate bench is formed
illegally or if a case which should not be
tried in public is tried in public, thelitigants have the right to apply forwithdrawal and put forward their opinions
about the relevant problems in the court
trial. If public procurators discover thatthe procedures violate the provisions of thelaw in the court trial, they can put forward
their opinions to the court. This isbeneficial to rectifying mistakes promptly
and ensuring a fair and legal court trial.
This does not impair the dignity of thecourt.
E. Supervision over the Executionof Punishment
Article 215 of the Criminal Procedure
Law stipulates that “the organ whichapproves temporary execution of a sentenceoutside prison should send a copy of thea p p r o v e d d e c i s i o n t o a p e o p l e ’s
procuratorate. If the people’s procuratorate
thinks it improper to temporarily executea sentence outside prison, it should giveits written opinion to the organ whichapproves temporary execution of a sentenceoutside prison within one month from the177

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 53
day it receives the notice. After the organ
which approves temporary execution of asentence outside prison receives thewritten opinion given by the people’s
procuratorate, it should immediately
reexamine the decision.”
Article 222 of the Criminal Procedure
L a w s t i p u l a t e s t h a t “ i f a p e o p l e ’s
procuratorate thinks that a people’s court
improperly makes a decision on a reductionof sentence or parole, it should give its
written opinion about rectifying mistakes
to the people’s court within 20 days after
the former receives a copy of the decision.
The people’s court should form anothercollegiate bench to try the case within one
month after it receives the written opinion
about rectifying mistakes and gives final
ruling.”Article 224 of the Criminal Procedure
L a w s t i p u l a t e s t h a t “ t h e p e o p l e ’s
procuratorate exercises supervision todetermine whether or not the execution ofpunishment by the executing organ is legal.
If the people’s procuratorate discovers
illegalities, it should notify the executingorgan of rectifying them.” According to theprovisions of the law, the procuratorialorgans supervise the execution ofpunishment by the executing organs, suchas prisons and organs responsible forsupervising and controlling offenders. The
scope of supervision does not include theother activities of the organs responsible
for supervision and controlling offenders,such as production and life. The
procuratorial organs exercise procuratorial
supervision over illegal acts which occur
in execution of a sentence, control of thet e r m o f p e n a l t y, i m p r i s o n m e n t
management, change in the execution of asentence, termination of the execution of asentence and management of supervisionand control of offenders exercised by the
executing organs.

178