Procuratorial Transparency: Legal Basis, Institutional Evolution, and the Practice of Chinese Procuratorial Reform

Authors

  • Hailing Li
  • Yifei Gao

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62051/ijsspa.v10n5.02

Keywords:

Procuratorial Transparency, Institutional Evolution, Four Major Prosecutorial Functions, Legal Supervision

Abstract

The legal basis of procuratorial transparency stems from the principle of popular sovereignty and the right to freedom of speech under China's Constitution, corresponding to the right to know and the right to access information under international covenants. It serves as the core system for safeguarding citizen supervision and regulating the operation of procuratorial power. China's procuratorial transparency was officially initiated in 1998 and has undergone multiple rounds of regulatory improvements, gradually forming an institutional system centered on the disclosure of case information, with synergy between online and offline platforms. In 2014, a nationwide unified case information disclosure network was established. In 2021, the scope of disclosure was further expanded to achieve full coverage of the "four major prosecutorial functions," with enhanced privacy protection and data release. In practice, procuratorial transparency has achieved remarkable results in enhancing judicial transparency, protecting the rights of parties involved, and facilitating social oversight. At the same time, current challenges remain, including a relatively narrow scope and format of disclosure, as well as the absence of a right to remedy mechanism. In the future, China should adhere to the principle of "disclosure as the rule, non-disclosure as the exception," adopt an exception-list legislative model, maximize the disclosure of law enforcement and case-handling information, improve the right to remedy channels, and build a more standardized, efficient, and transparent procuratorial transparency system with Chinese characteristics.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Thomas, S. (2002). The good, the bad, and the ugly: E-government and the people's right to know. Communication, 3, 68–74.

[2] Cao, J. M. (2013, July 1). Procuratorial transparency is the principle, non-disclosure is the exception. Xinhua Net. https://www.chinanews.com.cn/fz/2013/07-01/4986868.shtml

[3] Du, M. (2007, October 17). The basic network platform for information technology application in national procuratorial organs has taken shape. China Court News. https://www.chinacourt.cn/article/detail/2007/10/id/270647.shtml

[4] Gao, X. H. (2014, October 17). The “People's Procuratorate Case Information Disclosure Network” officially launched and operated. Supreme People's Procuratorate Official Website. https://www.spp.gov.cn/spp/zdgz/201410/t20141017_82137.shtml

[5] Tang, D. Z. (2006). Comparative analysis of freedom of government information acts. National Taiwan University Law Journal, 6, 37–115.

[6] Mendel, T. (2011). Freedom of information: A comparative legal survey (G. W. X., Trans.). Social Sciences Academic Press.

[7] Liu, J. (2005). The right to know and information disclosure act. Tsinghua University Press.

Downloads

Published

2026-05-29

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Li, H., & Gao, Y. (2026). Procuratorial Transparency: Legal Basis, Institutional Evolution, and the Practice of Chinese Procuratorial Reform. International Journal of Social Sciences and Public Administration, 10(5), 7-21. https://doi.org/10.62051/ijsspa.v10n5.02