A little-known Q&A tool used within China’s court system since last year was recently brought to the spotlight by the Supreme People’s Court.  With its promising performance, the tool allows the highest court to “free several birds with one key”.  The far-reaching impact of the tool also lays a solid foundation for China to develop artificial intelligence-assisted adjudication.

The Q&A Tool

Named Fa Da Wang (法答网), which literally means “Law-Answer Net”, the Q&A tool was launched by the Supreme People’s Court on July 1, 2023.  It is an online platform established within the court system to allow judges and other court personnel to ask questions concerning various legal issues encountered during legal research or adjudication, without reference to pending cases.  Answers to these questions are provided by formally appointed experts, who are senior judges and other trial professionals.  Although these answers contain insightful analyses supported by legislation and/or judicial interpretations, they are for reference only and do not have any legal effects.

“The establishment of the Law-Answer Net has been praised as an effective step to improve judicial capabilities and promote the ‘unified and correct application of law’.”

The establishment of the Law-Answer Net has been praised as an effective step to improve judicial capabilities and promote the “unified and correct application of law”. According to the 2023 Work Report of the Supreme People’s Court, a total of approximately 280,000 questions were asked in 2023 and approximately 230,000 of these questions were answered in the same year. Analyses from select Q&As reportedly led to the revision or drafting of 27 judicial documents.

Promising Performance

The past three weeks saw the official release of 20 Q&As selected from the Law-Answer Net.  Two Q&As are briefly summarized below to offer readers a glimpse of the platform’s useful content.

• Question: Can an injury suffered by an employee during the employee’s participation in a “team-building activity organized by the [work] unit” be determined to be “work-related”?
  
  In a multi-paragraph answer, the unidentified expert first examines relevant legislation and judicial rules and then summarizes the analysis as follows:

To sum up, [the issue as to] whether an injury suffered by an employee during the employee’s participation in a team-building activity organized by the [work] unit can be determined to be work-related should be [based on] a decision of whether the team-building activity is work-related.  The determination is to be made by comprehensively considering various aspects, including the purpose of the activity, [the party] covering the expenses, the content of the activity arrangement, and the composition of the participants.

Apparently because the determination depends on the circumstances of each case, the expert lists the case numbers of four similar cases so that interested readers can explore how the same legal issue was determined in these cases.

• Question: In a “criminal enforcement case” involving a fine, can enforcement of the order requiring payment of the fine be made against the “sole residence of the person subject to the enforcement”?
  
  The answer provides, among other details, the following:

[…] With respect to a residential house necessary for the livelihood of the person subject to the enforcement and his/her dependent family members, a people’s court may seal up the house but may not auction it off, sell it, or [use it] for debt payment.

[…] If the area of the [residential] house is quite large or its value is quite high and, as such, [the house] exceeds the living needs of the person subject to the enforcement and his/her dependent family members, [a people’s court] may […], on the premise of safeguarding the basic living conditions of the person subject to the enforcement and his/her dependent family members, exchange the [house] for [another one that is smaller, of inferior condition, or farther away] and use the amount realized from [the exchange] to pay the fine.

“Free Several Birds with One Key”

All the answers to the 20 questions—including the two questions discussed above—have been commended by scholars specialized in the legal topics addressed.  Through the Law-Answer Net, these answers will continue to be readily available to all judges handling similar cases in the future.  The guidance accompanying these answers will, therefore, help improve judicial capabilities and promote the “unified and correct application of law” in China—a primary goal of the establishment of the Law-Answer Net, as stated above.

In addition, the release of select Q&As from the Law-Answer Net allows the Supreme People’s Court to promote public legal education.  As China just announced that the number of its Internet users has reached 1.092 billion, the dissemination of these Q&As can be widespread.  With better understanding of the legal issues addressed by these Q&As, ordinary citizens involved in legal disputes concerning these issues can evaluate their chances of success more accurately, leading to a greater willingness to settle their disputes by less contentious methods such as negotiation and mediation.  This will help reduce Chinese courts’ caseload, thereby lessening Chinese judges’ work burden so that they will have more time to prepare quality judgments.

“The prospect of accomplishing all these goals through the Law-Answer Net is promising. The impact of this nascent tool is, however, more far-reaching.”

The prospect of accomplishing all these goals through the Law-Answer Net is promising.  The impact of this nascent tool is, however, more far-reaching.  Let’s step back and consider the characteristics of the tool:

• rapid generation of a large number of Q&As,
• application of a screening process to ensure that quality Q&As are retained for long-term use, and
• continuous efforts to polish the answers so that they are adapted to evolving situations. 

Clearly, these are also the ingredients of a perfect recipe for training a powerful artificial intelligence tool to assist adjudication.

---

• The citation of this article is: Dr. Mei Gechlik, China’s Top Court Frees “Several” Birds with One Key, SINOTALKS.COM^®, In Brief No. 42, Mar. 27, 2024, https://sinotalks.com/inbrief/202403-english-law-answer-net.
  The original, English version of this article was edited by Nathan Harpainter. The information and views set out in this article are the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the work or views of SINOTALKS^®. ↩︎

Related Articles