Zhou Guangquan (professor at the Law School of Tsinghua University): The ruling in criminal litigation will affect the balance of various social relations, which the judges must take into consideration before pronouncing sentences. Here, the key is to offer compensation to the victims and their families so that they can rehabilitate after the tragedy. It's also good for the society. If the sentence is only given as punishment, the victim's family cannot receive material benefit, apart from the possibility of feeling satisfied that the criminal will die.

The state ought to take up the responsibility to offer aid to the victims and their families and it must develop various mechanisms to ensure its citizens a safe living environment. However, for the time being, China is short of such mechanisms. In this case, I think it's natural and necessary for people's courts to pay more attention to the tangible interests of victims.

He Jiahong (professor at the Law School of China Renmin University): In essence, the law punishes the crime rather than the criminal. The guiding principle of China's Criminal Law requires extreme caution while passing the death penalty. Crimes will always place the victims and their families in an unfavorable condition. As a result, the most important thing is to help them recover and move on. To compensate the victims with money is another form of punishment for the defendants and if the financial compensation can help the families of the victims, all the better.

Money will never become the exchange term for redressing crime. It's wrong to connect compensation with unconditionally forgiving crime, but this new approach to deal with legal cases is at least something positive.

Zhou Xiaoxiang (China Economic Times): Although there is no definite legal base for "redeeming crime with money," it is in line with the final objective of the law, which is to safeguard various rights and interests of the victims.

There have been many examples of victims or their families not being paid due compensation. If this problem is not carefully handled, it may lead to more severe conflicts.

Having lived with the idea that murderers must receive the death penalty for thousands of years, it's great progress to accept the concept that murderers will not necessarily be sentenced to death.

From the perspective of building a harmonious society, this issue will help to enhance the respect for life, human rights and the rule of law. This is also laying a foundation for China to annul the death penalty both legally and through public opinion.

Liu Kejun (Huashang Daily): The purpose of compensating victims with cash is not to commute criminals' penalties, but to safeguard the victims' interests as much as possible. It is more beneficial to victims and their families to be paid and have the criminal punished, than to punish the criminal and receive no financial benefits.

Take the case in Dongguan as an example. It's true that to sentence the criminal to death totally conforms to the law, but apart from the satisfaction of retribution, what does the death penalty mean to the victim's family, who may be poverty-stricken? After the mediation of the Dongguan Court, the victim's family consented to commuting the perpetrator's death sentence to life imprisonment if they were paid 50,000 yuan as compensation. The economic benefit not only helps the victim's daughter to remain in school, but also lifts the whole family out of poverty. To benefit the victims, this is a good thing.

The court's obligation is to handle cases in accordance with the law. The public is not supposed to interfere too much into judicial practices. From the perspective of protecting the victims' interests, it's better for us to show tolerance for this new mechanism, and not to deny it from the very beginning.

Bad example

Xue Kezhi (Jiangnan Times): Some believe that it's proper to connect the compensation from defendants with the level of punishment. This may be so from the perspective of academic study. However, what the Dongguan Court faces is a real criminal case. In my opinion, to commute the penalty of the defendant who offers to pay financial compensation is a dangerous action that challenges the current legal system.