Introduction

The US criminal system is under the judicial system, which is divided into federal and state courts. The federal court includes the Supreme Court that deals with federal issues such as trade disputes, limitary and government lawsuits. In the US, criminal cases are heard by trial courts that have general jurisdictions, which consist of both a judge and a jury. When it comes to China, the legal system is more Marxist. There is a division of labor in judicial tasks, public security agencies, and people’s courts. The purpose of this paper is to compare the justice system of the People’s Republic of China with that of the United States.

 

The US and Chinese Substantive Law

The US substantive law is different from that of China in several ways, and it is under common law and legislative factions. Until the end of the 20th century, most of the substantive laws were developed from principles found in judicial decisions. Under the Chinese perspective, there is a current law in the force known as ‘free China’, which is under the nationalist government and is recognized by the United Nations (Hu, 2019). The Chinese criminal procedure has it that offenses directly infringed upon people’s rights are limited to private prosecution. In the US, public prosecution takes significant power when it comes to substantive law. The law is applied in that the person who is offended may personally institute a prosecution that will be against the offender.

When it comes to the functions of public prosecutors, there is no jury system in China as opposed to the case of the US. Chinese lawmakers believe that the jury system does not apply to the psychology of the people since it has not been practiced before (Tu et al., 2020). In the US, the jury system is accepted, as the Americans believe that it cannot cause hatred and collisions among the members of the public. The US justice system, in this case, acknowledges that finding facts requires skill, experience, and ordinary people can be trained to get competent in this. The burden of proof in the Chinese substantive law perspective makes facts that lead to justification of offense be under established evidence.

Procedural law in China and the US

The Chinese procedural law is different from that of the US. In China, the civil procedure law (CPL) is well established from in Chinese legal perspective, and when compared to substantive law, the procedural law has been for a long while been neglected. Under the CPL, courts can exercise judicial independence in trying cases. In the US, the judicial independence under article III provides that judges may hold their positions during what is referred to as ‘good behavior as long as they satisfy the legal and ethical elements of the judicial requirement(Tu et al., 2020). In China, the judicial system has been subservient to the political organs that are maligned to the government and the demands of the Communist Party.

On-time delivery!

Get your 100% customized paperdone in as little as 1 hour

Let’s start

The legal representation in China is slightly different from that of the US. No law must require an attorney to engage as a representative in legal tasks in china. In the US, any party that is arraigned or required on court cases must be observant of an attorney who will be part of the proceedings. When it comes to parties, there may be the use of one or two legal representatives to affect the matters (Tu et al., 2020). Thus, the two countries differ when it comes to the independence of representation for the clients during the court system.

Chinese vs. US Judicial Review

In China, there is no federal-state distinction as it is evident in the US. Chinese only have one court system that rules over major factions of the legal requirements. Unlike the US, China has no subject matter jurisdiction whereby each Chinese city has two levels of courts (Urinboevich, 2021). There are basic court levels and intermediate levels in court. For the United States, the court system splits on the basis of federal and state governments, and for that matter, there is a major difference. In China, a court may not fully exercise the jurisdiction unless there is state authorization and satisfaction of all requirements. When it comes to pleading, the Chinese judicial system is characterized by a plaintiff having direct interests in a lawsuit, which is not the case in the US (Wolff, 2018). For example, during a review, a court may determine whether it will agree with the submissions made by the accused in one week after receiving the complaint.

When it comes to real trials, the Chinese usually consist of judges and juror