Han Xu: Fair Justice is the "Pressure Relief Valve" of Society

Han Xu: Fair judiciary is society's "pressure relief valve"

Original Han Xu Rule of Law Vision November 13, 2024 12:10 Sichuan

The extreme incident at the Zhuhai Sports Center, which resulted in 35 deaths and 43 injuries, has shocked and outraged people. After condemning Fan's heinous act, we need to draw lessons from this extreme incident and prevent similar tragedies from happening again.

It is understood that this "Zhuhai incident" is by no means a simple individual crime, but the evil result of social contradictions impacting individual psychology. Suspect Fan vented his anger on innocent citizens due to issues with the division of property in his divorce, reflecting social contradictions that cannot be underestimated. Modern society is developing at a high speed, and the adjustments and changes in social structures and interest relationships breed various contradictions. If problems such as economic disputes and emotional breakdowns are not handled properly, they can become triggers for vicious cases. The judiciary is the last line of defense for social fairness and justice, and it is final and authoritative in resolving contradictions. Once this "barrier" falls, various violent and extreme incidents are unavoidable. Recalling the incident in Luohe, Henan, where Judge "Wang Jiajia" was murdered by a party to the case, further highlights the important role of the judiciary in dispute resolution, comforting people's hearts, and social stability. Divorce cases are the most intense area of conflict, both in China and abroad. Therefore, anti-social behavior originating from divorce cases is the most harmful, and judges should treat it with caution. Therefore, judicial fairness has a deterrent effect on the occurrence of extreme events. This is why we call for judicial fairness.

Fair judiciary has the function of resolving disputes and stopping conflicts. The judiciary is committed to resolving disputes, and disputes are inevitable problems in human society. When the parties to a dispute cannot resolve it themselves, they will resort to judicial resolution. If the judiciary is fair, the solution or judgment may be accepted by both parties with conviction; if the judiciary is unfair, it will not only fail to resolve the dispute but also trigger new contradictions and conflicts, and it is even possible that Fan, as in this case, will vent his dissatisfaction in an extreme anti-social manner and take it out on others.

Fair judiciary has the function of comforting people's hearts. "Let the people feel fairness and justice in every judicial case." The "feeling" here is actually "procedural justice." There is a Western legal maxim: Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done. Only by "seeing" can one "feel." In procedural justice, procedural participation has the function of absorbing dissatisfaction and comforting people's hearts. Therefore, for judicial judgments, it is not enough to say that the judiciary has achieved judicial fairness simply because the judgment is correct and legally based; process fairness must also be considered, that is, whether the parties were treated fairly in the litigation, whether their rights were protected, and whether they were given due respect. The judiciary should not only have strength but also warmth. Only when the parties feel warmth will they not be "disheartened" and will not suffer "secondary harm" from entering the judicial process.

Fair judiciary has the function of maintaining order and stability. When the judiciary fails to meet social expectations and cannot be "impartial," that is, when the public is "harmed" by the judiciary, they will seek private remedies—taking "weapons" into their own hands to attack the other party, or becoming discouraged and pessimistic, developing anti-social personalities, attacking judicial staff, or transferring dissatisfaction with the judiciary and judicial personnel to innocent citizens. Judges should recognize the social functions they bear.

Fair judiciary has the function of social regulation. Society is composed of all sorts of people and is a dynamic and fluid combination. Therefore, society needs optimization, and people's hearts need to be guided towards goodness. Fair judiciary can empower the powerless, fill the disappointed with confidence in the future, and bring warmth to the disheartened. This social regulatory function is not valued by judicial organs, which unilaterally emphasize "case closure and dispute resolution." In fact, in many cases, it is "case closure" but not "dispute resolution." This is largely due to a failure to recognize the social regulatory function of the judiciary. If the judiciary drives a normal person "crazy," can we still say that the judiciary is fair?

Fair judiciary has the function of protecting human rights. Human rights are the rights that make a person human, and the right to life is the most basic and important human right. "When one person despairs, the whole society is insecure." Fan despaired, but 15 innocent lives were lost in an instant with his rampage, and 43 people were bleeding, with broken limbs, groaning in hospital beds... the right to life and health of others disappeared because of one person's despair. Therefore, fair judiciary can reduce the risk of harm to innocent people.

From killing judges, a specific individual, to killing the masses, an innocent group, the conflict is escalating, the violence is escalating, and our lives are becoming more insecure. As someone said: We are fortunate that we were not exercising at the stadium at that moment, that we did not appear on the road or the bridge where the incident occurred, but we are all on the public bus of society. When this public bus of society is unsafe, can any of us "passengers" be safe? Therefore, judicial fairness is not only the expectation of the parties to the case but also the hope of each of us who are "standing aside." Do not think that the consequences of judicial injustice are borne only by the parties, judges, and prosecutors; in fact, we are all victims. The "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" affirms the freedom from fear. Can everyone who learns about the "Zhuhai incident" be free from fear? Do not think that this incident only concerns Fan and the victims and their families; it concerns the safety of each of us. Who can guarantee that a second or third "Zhuhai incident" will not happen? If you happen to be passing by, the consequences would be unimaginable.

This incident made me think again of the famous poem "For Whom the Bell Tolls" by the English poet John Donne. "No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as any manner of thy friends or of thyself; any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind. And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee!" Especially the line "Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind." It strikes a chord. We should think about how to maintain the "public bus" we are all riding together. Undeniably, modern people are full of anxiety and depression, and are under pressure from an unknown future and a difficult life. A fair judiciary is society's "pressure regulator" and "pressure relief valve," which can give us expectations for life, prevent us from living in fear of uncertainty, allow us to sleep soundly and have sweet dreams, and share family happiness with our loved ones.

Judiciary, when can you stop me from crying for you tonight!

(The author is a professor and doctoral supervisor at the Law School of Sichuan University)