The Rule of Law: An Impossible Dream in China?

The rule of law is considered by the Chinese authorities to be one of the 12 core socialist values, alongside prosperity, democracy, civility, harmony, freedom, equality, justice, patriotism, dedication, integrity, and friendship. Today, on nearly every street corner in China, people can see banners, posters, or giant screens that promote these 12 values.

Since the Mao era ended and China opened up 40 years ago, generation after generation of Chinese high leaders have vowed to establish the country under the rule of law – not rule by law, which the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is often accused to prioritizing.

However, again and again, the Chinese public has found that these leaders’ remarks were only empty promises.

The latest televised confession by a Chinese Supreme Court judge-turned-whistleblower is another shocking blow to the Chinese people who still have faith in achieving the rule of law in China.

On primetime television on February 22, Chinese state broadcaster CCTV released a 22-minute TV program that specifically elaborated on a series of misdeeds conducted by Wang Linqing, an assistant judge of the Chinese Supreme Court, over the past few years. Wang, 47, who has a Ph.D. in law, also appeared in the program, confessing his misconduct, explaining his motives, and apologizing to Chinese citizens in front of the camera.

Yet just weeks ago, Wang was calling for attention from all Chinese citizens for a different reason: He exposed problems within the Supreme Court and was worried about his own safety.

The story can be traced back to last December, when a series of self-made video clips about Wang were posted on China’s social media platform, Weibo.

In those video clips, Wang spoke to the camera, detailing two “strange” cases he had worked on several years ago and the consequential unfair treatment he had received from his supervisors.

“The reason I record these videos,” he said in the beginning of one video clip, “is to save some evidence for myself so as to prevent unexpected misfortune.”

According to Wang, the strangest case he had worked on involved a dispute between a private company and a state-owned firm in Shaanxi Province. The two companies were disputing mining rights worth hundreds of billions of Chinese renminbi.

What’s strange was not the case itself, but what happened to Wang personally while he was working on the case. Wang said that when he tried to review the case documents stored in his office one day, he found that one important file had disappeared. In this file, there was evidence showing that Zhou Qiang, chief justice and president of the Supreme Court, had a bias against the private company.

Wang immediately reported the file’s mysterious disappearance to his direct supervisor, but his supervisor appeared “highly calm.” Wang then suggested that his supervisor review the videos of the court’s security cameras, since there are two security cameras outside his office. Yet his supervisor later told him that the relevant footage, which should have been stored by the court’s security department, had been lost.

In another video clip, Wang described a separate incident where another supervisor asked him to judge a case in a certain way. After Wang refused to do so, he received a series of unfair treatment and punishment during his work at the court.

The series of self-recorded video clips deeply shocked the public. The Supreme Court initially denied that the file Wang mentioned had disappeared, but under strong pressure, the court finally admitted it and promised to undertake a internal investigation. Unsurprisingly, the Chinese public was suspicious of the Supreme Court’s credibility in investigating itself. Many Chinese netizens directly pointed out that the disappearance of the file in the first place could be a result of internal corruption.

In January, the Central Political and Legal Affairs Commission (CPLAC) of the CCP decided to set up an investigation team over Wang’s case. The team was made up of officials from the CCP’s Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (CCDI), the National Supervisory Commission (NSC), the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security.

In China’s political dictionary, “political and legal work” involves all the work related to China’s legal enforcement system, including the CCDI, the police force, the procuratorates, the ministry of justice, the judicial branch, the state security agency, and other relevant departments. Under China’s political system, the CPLAC, which is directly under the CCP’s Central Committee, oversees all these authorities in practice.

After over a month, the investigation team released its investigation result. That was where CCTV acquired all its material, including Wang’s confession in front of the camera, for the 22-minute TV program.

The result provided by the investigation team is completely different from what Wang had said in his self-recorded videos.

According to the investigation team, it was actually Wang who stole the important file and hid it at his home, due to Wang’s “personal grudge” against the Supreme Court and his supervisors.

Other than attempting to cause trouble for his supervisors, Wang explained his actions by saying that he did not want other judges to share the credit for the case, which he thought was a significant one. “Another reason I took [the file] home was to stop other [judges] from working on [the case],” Wang said to a reporter behind the camera.

Wearing a white shirt and a dark coat, Wang looked noticeably thinner on CCTV than he was in his self-recorded films.

“I have to sincerely apologize to all netizens. What I have done fooled their kind hearts.” Wang said.

“People all think you are a righteous judge,” the reporter behind the camera noted.

Wang sighed and sniffled. “I am sorry I disappointed all netizens. I did want to be a righteous judge, but my conduct left me on the opposite side,” he answered.

The investigation team also looked into other issues Wang mentioned in his earlier videos. In short, the investigation team found only small problems, such as “delayed trials, loose internal management, and poor management of confidential documents” of the Supreme Court.

By contrast, the investigation team concluded that Wang was suspected of illegally obtaining and intentionally leaking state secrets. His case has been handed over to the police, which means that Wang is likely to end up in prison.

Although the TV program claimed that the investigators “held more than 210 interviews with people involved, reviewed over 100 files and documents, carefully examined video and digital evidence, and processed information from the public,” the final investigation result is obviously full of flaws.

Most importantly, the method of public confession (made by a Supreme Court judge, no less) reminded people of China’s Cultural Revolution, when everybody had to admit their crimes against their will without a proper trial.

Thus, immediately after the TV program was broadcast, a large number of rebuttals and questions written by Chinese netizens were posted online, despite fierce censorship.

Ironically, on February 24, the People’s Court Daily, a newspaper run by the Supreme Court, published an editorial on its front page. The editorial, under the title of “Adhering to the Party’s absolute leadership over the work of the people’s court,” claimed that “the Chinese people are highly convinced and very satisfied with this authoritative conclusion” of Wang’s case.

“The Supreme Court is the highest judicial organ of the country and is the symbol of fairness and justice,” the editorial said. “The establishment of the investigation team not only reflects the respect for public opinion and the truth, but also demonstrates the Party’s strong determination to safeguard judicial authority and the people’s trust.”

In conclusion, the editorial repeatedly vowed that the Supreme Court would adhere to the Party’s absolute leadership and safeguard Chinese President Xi Jinping’s status as the core of the CCP Central Committee.

Jamie Horsley, a visiting fellow in the John L. Thornton China Center in the Foreign Policy program at Brookings and a senior fellow at the Paul Tsai China Center and visiting lecturer in law at Yale Law School, once wrote that “Rule of law connotes a system under which law acts as a curb on state and private power. Rules are set in advance and applied consistently, equally, and transparently by independent courts that serve as a backstop to protect civil, political, and human rights.”

However, Xi has repeatedly emphasized the CCP’s leadership over everything, including the legal system. He has also publicly declared that China “must never follow the path of Western ‘constitutionalism,’ ‘separation of powers,’ or ‘judicial independence.’”

Xi’s placing of the Party above law means that in China, the rule of law will remain an impossible dream, at least for the foreseeable future. The drama surrounding a Supreme Court judge is just more evidence of that hard truth.