The Supreme Court should try to verify the facts to avoid unjust or false cases, said Chen of the China University of Political Science and Law. Some insiders hold that the court's original intention in taking back the power to review death penalty decisions is to avoid having too many reviewers, which might lead to improper outcomes because of the different criteria for imposing the death penalty used by different reviewers.

"And now it's the Supreme Court's duty to make a tough decision on cases in which the death penalty is discretionary," said Xu of the Jiangxi Provincial High People's Court.

Under such conditions, applying caution to imposing the death penalty while guaranteeing the fairness of a trial through reading the trial documents poses a real challenge for the Supreme Court. But it has been preparing for the tough job, including requiring second-phase trials to be held in open court and requiring the videotaping of the entire trial process since July 1, 2006.

To meet the manpower needs of its heavier workload, the Supreme Court has chosen criminal-case judges from local courts, law schools and the legal community. The judicial system has also been altered to handle the situation.

The Supreme Court has also issued a regulation stipulating that the reviewer of files in a death-penalty case must submit a comprehensive report after reading the case files.

"The Supreme Court's taking back the power to review the death penalty is more valuable on the systemic level than its actual effects," legal expert Liu Xiaohu at Renmin University of China told Beijing Review.

"To guarantee the justice and fairness of the death penalty review is also something that deserves much consideration," Liu continued. For cases in which the imposition of the death penalty is vague, the outcome largely reflects the attitude toward the death penalty of the members of the review panel. If death-penalty supporters make up the majority of the panel, then a death sentence is likely to be imposed.

Liu also said he thinks a power-equilibrating mechanism is necessary for a just and fair death penalty review. That is to say, it needs someone to watch over and supervise the process. "Supervision by the Supreme People's Procuratorate is quite important to the justice and fairness of the death penalty review," Liu said.

The Trial System in China According to the current Constitution and the Law on the Organization of People's Courts, these courts are the main trial organ. Organizationally, this court system consists of local courts, special courts and the Supreme Court, with the first two categories subject to the supervision of the latter. Local courts are established in accordance with administrative divisions, while special courts are set up where necessary. Local courts are divided into three levels: Grassroots, Intermediate and Higher. The Supreme People's Court is the highest judicial organ in China and is responsible to the National People's Congress and its Standing Committee. It independently exercises the highest judicial right under the law and without any interference from administrative organs, social organizations or individuals. Its structure comprises a judicial committee and courts-the No. 1 Criminal Tribunal, the No. 2 Criminal Tribunal, the Civil Tribunal, the Economic Tribunal, the Administrative Tribunal, the Complaint and Appeal Tribunal and the Communication and Transportation Tribunal. The Functions and Rights of the Supreme People's Court (SPC)? 1. Conducting trials of the following cases: first-phase cases placed under the SPC's jurisdiction by law and regulation and those the SPC deems within its jurisdiction; appeals or protests against trial decisions or verdicts of the higher people's courts and special people's courts; appeals against court judgments lodged by the Supreme People's Procuratorate according to trial supervision procedures. 2. Giving approval to death sentences. The SPC may, when necessary, delegate the right of approval of death sentences in cases of murder, rape, looting, destruction with explosives and other cases that severely endanger and harm public security and social order. 3. Supervising trials by local people's courts and special people's courts at different levels. 4. On discovering mistakes in the rulings and verdicts of local people's courts already being legally enforced, conducting questioning or appointing a lower level court to conduct a rehearing. 5. Giving approval to verdicts on crimes not specifically stipulated in the criminal law. 6. Offering explanations of the concrete application of laws during the trial process. Source: china.org.cn