Building Socialist Legality: Political Order and Institutional Development in the Soviet and Chinese Procuracies

Hanson, Margaret; Thompson-Brusstar, Michael

doi:10.1080/09668136.2020.1854185

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This system of subordination at two levels is a political adaptation of the Soviet procuracy, the most authoritative institution in the Soviet legal system after which the procuratorate is modeled (Ginsburgs 1959;Oda 1986;Smith 1978Smith , 1984. The Soviet procuracy was a centralized, hierarchical apparatus that maintained organizational independence from other state institutions and was well known for its supervisory function to oversee the observance of laws by all ministries, government agencies, enterprises, social organizations, and individuals (general supervision), as well as the application of the law in criminal processes (special supervision) (Ginsburgs and Stahnke 1968;Hanson and Thompson-Brusstar 2021;Morgan 1960). Prosecutorial accountability in the Soviet system is manifested in the vertical system organized on the principles of independence, uniformity, and centralization, with prosecutors responsible only to the Supreme Soviet of the ussr (Loeber 1986;Smith 1978: 14).…”

Section: Prosecutorial Accountability In the Constitutional Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountable for a Lifetime: Reforms in Prosecutorial Accountability in China

Mou

2022

China Law Soc. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The judicial accountability reform in China introduced the concept of lifelong accountability, which requires prosecutors to be responsible for the cases they handle by tying their reputation and career prospects to the quality of the cases, regardless of whether they still hold those positions. To explain this lifelong accountability, this article analyzes key issues surrounding prosecutorial accountability in the Chinese context, critically examining the accountability system before the reform and the transformations brought about by the new accountability regime. It argues that although lifelong accountability is expected to be a deterrent to prosecutorial misconduct, the feasibility of the accountability mechanism is subject to doubt. The reform tries to form collective responsibility, enabling frontline prosecutors to exercise greater autonomy. However, it has not led to a paradigm shift from the predominantly bureaucratic model to prosecutorial professionalism, which demonstrates profound distrust in the prosecutor’s judgment at a fundamental level.

show abstract

Section: Prosecutorial Accountability In the Constitutional Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountable for a Lifetime: Reforms in Prosecutorial Accountability in China

Mou

2022

China Law Soc. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Supreme Supervisors? Building the People’s Procuracy, 1949–1961

Thompson-Brusstar

2022

China Law Soc. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article interrogates the main events in procuratorial development from 1949 to 1961. Its aim is to better understand the procuracy during the Maoist era by reframing debates about its development along a spectrum: from primarily internal debates that challenged the development of the institution to external debates that challenged the role of the institution. These two dimensions also clarify how the procuracy reflected the politics of the time, especially issues of state construction and building legal knowledge, both within the state and among the “people.” The article shows that “internal” debates stemmed from the largely elite-centered and technocratic concerns of internal organization; “external” debates connected, instead, to broader concerns about the socialist legal project and the procuracy’s place in it. Reframing the institution’s history in this way enables us to understand the concepts and issues shaping the procuracy that crossed “period” boundaries and how responses to those challenges changed over time. Internal limitations (due to lack of resources) and external challenges (to develop flexible methods for accomplishing institutional goals while appearing to serve national objectives) are entwined, making the procuracy from 1949 to 1961 a site of tension between law and policy as well as a locus of contestation about the role of law in Maoist China.

show abstract

The Imaginaries of Regulatory Spaces in an Age of Administrative Discretion: Social Credit ‘in’ or ‘as’ the Cage of Regulation of Socialist Legality

Backer

2022

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building Socialist Legality: Political Order and Institutional Development in the Soviet and Chinese Procuracies

Cited by 3 publications

References 27 publications

Accountable for a Lifetime: Reforms in Prosecutorial Accountability in China

Accountable for a Lifetime: Reforms in Prosecutorial Accountability in China

Supreme Supervisors? Building the People’s Procuracy, 1949–1961

The Imaginaries of Regulatory Spaces in an Age of Administrative Discretion: Social Credit ‘in’ or ‘as’ the Cage of Regulation of Socialist Legality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About