English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Drawing on published verdicts and interviews, this article studies how political pressures influence criminal adjudication outcomes. While the regime mandates rigid sentencing, judges, acting under political pressures from both above and below, covertly impose biased penalties on petitioners accused of creating a disturbance. For defendants who petitioned Beijing or petitioned during a sensitive period, judges are subject to pressure from above and accordingly impose longer sentences and restrict the use of probation. For petitioners who seek support from mass allies, judges reduce the defendant’s sentence and grant probation, as pressure from below helps judges to partly resist administrative interferences. The criminal adjudication on petitioning is thus politicized, as political pressures from different sources covertly influence the litigation outcomes in conflicting manners.

Politicized Adjudication Vis-à-vis Petitioners in Chinese Criminal Justice