Trust in the judiciary has declined. First, there is a phenomenon that some judicial organs handle cases for money, which damages the image of judicial organs. Individual case handlers take bribes and pervert the law, which has a bad social impact. The so-called "good things don't go out, bad things spread thousands of miles" and "a mouse excrement ruined a pot of porridge", which made some people's trust in the judiciary decline. Second, public opinion propaganda has also affected the people's trust in the judiciary. Although the problem of difficulty in going to court exists objectively, the concept of "difficulty in going to court" is deeply rooted in people's hearts through some media's excessive reports on cases of "difficulty in going to court", and the reports of judicial corruption make people feel more "difficulty in going to court".
(2) The people's litigation level is not high. Limited by legal knowledge, many people do not fully understand the litigation risks in litigation, have a weak sense of proof, and do not fully understand the risks in the execution of judgments. They believe that as long as it is reasonable, it should win the case and will certainly be implemented after winning the case. They "passed on" all the responsibilities to the court and asked the court to arrange them. Once the risk is encountered, it is difficult to understand and accept, and it is considered that the court's ineffective handling of the case causes "difficulty in litigation".
(3) Some judges have outdated concepts and ignore the litigation rights of the parties. I believe that as long as there is no problem in entity handling, some small procedural problems are nothing, and the phenomenon of illegal procedures has not been fundamentally solved. To a certain extent, some judges still have the idea of handling cases by case, and the legal effect and social effect of handling cases are not organically combined, so there is a phenomenon of "officials are not for the people", which leads to the parties still unable to accept the judgment and complain everywhere after the case is concluded, which has a bad influence on the image of the court to a certain extent.
(4) A few courts have handled cases unfairly and failed to enforce the law. Judging from the statistical investigation, a few courts are unfair, unhappy and ineffective in handling cases. Although the number is small, the impact is extremely bad, which seriously affects the reputation of the court. In addition, the unhealthy trend of the lawyer industry has also impacted and interfered with fair justice. Driven by economic interests, some agents take various ways to win over and corrupt judges. Individual lawyers even cheat clients and demand money and goods from clients in the name of giving benefits to judges, which tarnishes the reputation of courts and judges. In terms of fees, the fees in some cases are higher than the standards stipulated in the Measures of the People's Courts on Fees. Cases that delay, reduce or waive legal fees account for 1.2% of all cases charged, and the proportion is not large.
(5) The litigation cost is high. At present, the court fees are charged according to the disputed amount, and the fees for case acceptance, litigation preservation, counterclaim, appeal, appraisal and execution need to be paid in advance, so the parties need to prepare a large amount of fees first. In addition, some parties have to hire lawyers, and the high lawyer fees also increase the burden on the parties. In addition, the parties concerned have to pay certain lost time, transportation expenses, investigation and evidence collection fees, printing fees, etc. Together, these make the parties have a deep understanding of the high cost of litigation.
(six) the court case funds are tight and the equipment is backward. This is mainly manifested in the low efficiency of handling cases in grass-roots courts and courts due to the problem of handling funds, and the execution in different places cannot be carried out normally.
Fourth, some suggestions to overcome the "difficulties"
(a) adhere to the guiding ideology of "justice for the people", firmly establish an open, fair and just modern judicial concept, and comprehensively improve the political quality and professional quality of judges.
(2) Improve the trial mechanism and improve the trial efficiency. Carry out the diversion system of complex cases, expand the scope of application of summary procedures, reduce litigation costs, improve litigation efficiency and reduce the litigation burden of parties; Take practical measures to strictly limit the trial, ensure that the case is concluded in time, shorten the trial period of the case, and make the parties get rid of the litigation dispute as soon as possible; Strict retrial filing standards, solve the final issue, and reduce the unnecessary litigation burden of the parties.
(3) Reform and innovate the implementation system. "Difficult execution" is an important problem that puzzles the court. It can be said that the "difficulty in litigation" has been solved by half. We believe that if the debtor intentionally evades the debt, it should make legal provisions to sanction and restrain his behavior; As for the local protection, we should reform the setting of executive organs to avoid and solve this problem.
(4) Intensify legal publicity and raise the legal awareness of the whole people. In litigation activities, the people's court should strengthen publicity and publicize the work of the court in various forms such as case discussion. Judging from this survey, some people who think it is difficult to go to court are told by relatives or friends. Therefore, the people's courts themselves should intensify propaganda, increase the transparency of litigation activities, let the parties and the broad masses of the people know about the judicial litigation activities of the people's courts, and support the work of the courts. In this survey, some people saw some specific cases from newspapers and TV and thought it was difficult to go to court. It is necessary to strengthen publicity and public relations, reduce exaggerated and distorted publicity on the problems existing in the courts, and increase positive publicity. Strive for the whole society's understanding of the work of the court, establish the image of the people's court's fair justice, and enhance the credibility of the court.
(5) Establish and improve the judicial assistance system. We will improve the provisions on the exemption and deferment of legal fees for cases of laid-off workers, the elderly, minors, the disabled, migrant workers, etc. to recover alimony, maintenance fees, pensions, wages, etc. Continue to pay attention to vulnerable groups, reduce litigation costs according to law, and ensure that people who are well-founded and have no money can go to court and win the lawsuit. Strengthen the business communication and coordination between the court and legal aid institutions, and improve the working mechanism of their effective connection. Unify the standards and conditions of judicial assistance and legal aid, and facilitate legal aid lawyers to appear in court.
(6) Conscientiously implement the provisions of the Supreme People's Court's "Specific Measures for Implementing Justice for the People", actively explore the application of the principle of "two conveniences" in judicial activities, and establish and improve the convenience system of people's courts. Take circuit trials and handle cases on the spot to facilitate mass litigation.
(7) It is suggested to amend the Civil Procedure Law, cancel the retrial system, and establish a diversified trial-level system with the second instance as the main, the third instance as the final and the first instance as the auxiliary. It is stipulated that general cases shall be subject to the system of second instance and final adjudication. Cases with universal legal application significance, cases across provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government, and major foreign-related cases that may involve local protectionism shall be subject to the system of three trials and final adjudication. If the case is simple, the relationship between rights and obligations is particularly clear, and the litigation object is small, the parties can choose whether to implement the system of first instance and final adjudication.