On the afternoon of November 9, the National Assembly discussed in groups the Law on Organization of People's Courts (amended). The draft law proposes that courts are not obliged to collect evidence in criminal, administrative, and civil cases.
Speaking at the meeting, Chief Justice of the Supreme People's Court Nguyen Hoa Binh said that no country in the world allows the court to collect evidence. This is the responsibility of both criminal and civil prosecution agencies.
In the principle of adversarial proceedings, the court stands in the middle to ensure fairness and objectivity, without favoring any side. “If it stands on one side, it will lack objectivity. Should the court collect evidence that is beneficial to the state agency and disadvantageous to the people?”, Chief Justice Nguyen Hoa Binh analyzed.
Regarding the regulation on the organization of courts according to jurisdiction, that is, the innovation in the organization of provincial and district courts, the Chief Justice of the Supreme People's Court said that there are still many concerns. The innovation with the high court, the supreme court, and the establishment of specialized courts are basically supported. However, there are still different opinions on changing provincial courts into appellate courts and district courts into first instance courts.
According to Resolution 27 of the Party on the organization of courts according to jurisdiction and according to the Constitution, there are 2 levels: appellate and first instance. In special cases, there are supervisory courts and retrials. The Chief Justice informed that in the history of the court's formation since 1946 and noted that in the 1946 Constitution, there were also first instance and appellate courts.
Mr. Nguyen Hoa Binh emphasized that it is necessary to clearly understand that the court is a judicial body of the State, exercising national jurisdiction, not the jurisdiction of districts or provinces. The organization by province or district can easily be mistaken as the province directing the district in administrative matters, which does not ensure independence.
According to him, changing the name of provincial and district courts to courts of first instance and appeal does not affect other agencies, and no laws need to be amended.
Explaining why the appellate court still handles first-instance cases, Chief Justice Nguyen Hoa Binh said that for major corruption cases, the district does not have enough capacity so it should be sent to the province for handling. "The province still mainly handles appeals, but in some cases where the law assigns, the province still handles first-instance cases. This is due to the provisions of the law," Mr. Binh said, adding that in other countries, the Supreme Court still handles first-instance cases, not just appeals.
The Chief Justice acknowledged that when the capacity of the court of first instance (district court) improves, it will move towards assigning the court of first instance to try cases with high sentences such as life imprisonment, death penalty, imprisonment over 15 years...
Currently, the court has to try more than 600,000 cases each year, while there are only 15,000 staff, leading to overload. The Chief Justice of the Supreme People's Court believes that if this is corrected, it will help reduce the above situation.
In addition, according to current regulations, judges are currently divided into many levels. Chief Justice Nguyen Hoa Binh said that this is causing "extreme difficulties" for judges' work, affecting people's trust in the court.
"I speak for the thoughts and aspirations of nearly 6,000 first-instance judges, from the time they enter the profession, through training, to retirement, receiving their books, and being primary-level judges for life, without enjoying any benefits... This amendment to the law raises the issue of eliminating first-instance and appeal courts, so that judges have levels, so that they can strive to pursue their professional career," Mr. Nguyen Hoa Binh shared.
Source
Comment (0)