Thanks for your post. I found it interesting that you website (although it seems to be a bit slow here in China) is not blocked. I hope some of our readers check it out.

The main problem with talking about the death penalty in China is that in reality, little is actually known about it. The cases are not generally very well publicized unless the Chinese government has a compelling reason for the public and the world to know.

China’s justice system does need a makeover at all levels. With a country of 1.3 billion people though, it is hard to imagine that a justice system like the U.S. has would ever work here.

Yes, that’s true. But China totally has 1.3billion. The rate will not be higher than other countries.

Amnesty international is not always right. I could say most of the cases shows the right justice. Only a few cases may be disputable.
Even in US, misjudgement is happened. The notorious “Simpson case” is the example. Everyone knew that he commited the crime but he was sentenced to be free.

You said “It uses evidence extracted under torture. It restricts defendants’ access to lawyers. ” . I think you just heard about that, not really saw that. You are still ignorant about the procedure of Chinese interrogation. Torture is forbidden in interrogation by law in China. But there is some people who violated this rule. That’s rare. We know US army tortured the Iraq prisons. Should we conclude that US is the evil government which tortured people all the time?

Please take a look those polictial dissents. Where are they now? Most of them are in US. I’m sure Mr. Hu Jia will join them soon in the future although he is now in prison. None of them have been sentenced to death.

Please think and read more issues by yourself, not simply listen what Amnesty International told you.

According to the Chinese culture, death penalty has to be there. Otherwise the killing rate will increase quickly. That’s the frighten power for those people who wants to use killing to ease their anger.

Any push on this issue is useless. Death penalty is from Chinese people’s will. Other country should respect to Chinese’s own decision. That’s the democracy.

There are more countries you could point to. First you may push Singapore which I support too. Please Don’t waste time on China.

Nobody sentenced to death in China gets a fair trial in line with international standards, according to Amnesty International.

That’s because Chinese system doesn’t presume innocence. It uses evidence extracted under torture. It restricts defendants’ access to lawyers. And it’s subject to political interference.

Put pressure on China to reform its use of the death penalty. Do it now, while the world is watching, in a few months’ time, when the Olympics are over, the world be will looking elsewhere - they won’t care.

http://www.uncensor.com.au

First of all, I doubted the story your Chinese friend told you. 400 RMB equaled to 1year’s salary at that time. I don’t think it’s qualified to be sentenced to death at that time. If it did happen, I think there was big problem of their loacl government to understand the heavy punishment movement policy at that time. At the time of heavy punishment, the theft may be sentenced to more than 10 years perhaps instead of 3 to 10 years.

Which crime could be sentenced to death during heavy punishment movement? It depended on the harmfulness of social effect.

Like robbery with weapon(like knife) in the open area, violent rape, those normally can not be sentenced to death, but the government thought this kind of crime brought very bad consequences and make very harmful to the sociaty and this happened at the time of movement that means they are so dareful to do this. The proverb in China is “No sentence to death unable to ease the anger of the people”. That’s the condition.
But from this thought, you would see that 400 of theft can not generate so many anger of the people and have no big impact on social stable. It’s not qualified to death. I think there are other criminals he did behind or some other reason behind. Wish your friend can make sure he knew full version of the story instead of just piece.

And normally those criminal will not be sentenced to death immediately, normally the movement lasted for 1 or 2 months. At the end of the movement, a public sentence meeting was held in the open area, all of those criminals are senteneced there. The purpose of that is to frighten those who are going to commit crime. After the movement, the rate of criminal decreased sharply. That’s the truth.
Personally I don’t think it’s fair to those sentenced criminals, especially those who just commit the rape. But it’s the past and there were no such kind of heavy punishment movement any more. It has nothing to do the current death peanalty situation. Just wonder why you are going to use such an extreme case to be related to the death penalty now.

When I read articles from Reader Digest discussing about the death penalty in US. Some cases like that the criminal was sentenced into prison and later was paroled and then he commited another rape and killed the victims. Then he returned to prison. Later again that happened.
The question is that the right of non death penalty of the criminal has been protected but why the living right of victim is unable to protect? I think it’s still the debate in US too. That’s why some states are still keeping the death penalty.

Does US government really appreciate for Non death penalty for everyone? I doubt about that. Sadam is the case. It’s an act of hypocrite.

Current Chinese court make the death penalty in very cautious status from my ovservation. Lots of case the criminal was sentenced to death but with 2 years delay for execution. That’s means it will not be executed finally.

Some cases the person will be sentenced to death definetely, like killing people during robbery, drugs etc which has very harmful to the sociaty. This is really supported by most of Chinese people. I heard the discussion about government tried to abandon death penalty but I think people will not agree.

In China capital punishment is indeed supported by the public. There is more cultural reason than pure legislative motives. Once back a while the supreme court somewhat complained that the lacking of public understanding hinders the effort of restricting the use of death penalties.