For Chinese judges Lang Guimei and Du Qiang, 2007 was a summer to remember. The judges from the Supreme People’s Court of China spent nine weeks in the United States as part of IFES’ new Judicial Exchange Program, including visits to Washington and Los Angeles.

The program, funded by the Wallis Foundation and ExxonMobil, allowed the judges an inside look at the U.S. court system and federal government. In Washington, they visited the U.S. Supreme Court, Department of Justice, federal and district courts, attended congressional hearings on judicial issues and observed a campaign event for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Du said before the trip he read widely about the U.S. system, but the chance to see the courts himself was inspiring.

“This trip has opened my eyes and widened my horizons,” he said.

The two judges were the first to participate in the IFES Judicial Exchange Program, the latest step in IFES’ efforts to promote judicial transparency and independence in China. IFES began working in China in 2005 in partnership with the Chinese Institute of Applied Jurisprudence, which is the research and reform division of the Supreme People’s Court. That year, IFES sponsored two seminars in Sichuan and Yunnan Provinces to bring together judicial officials from China, the U.S., Latin America and Europe.

Rise in Court Cases

Lang said the summer exchange program built upon previous seminars giving her a better understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court structure and its enormous support staff. In addition to visiting with judicial colleagues, the judges audited courses at American University’s College of Law and conducted research on judicial management and case report systems.

The exchange also provided an opportunity to educate American judges about the changes taking place in the Chinese court system, said Lang. The judicial systems in China and the United States face similar challenges, among these being how to increase efficiency and handle a high volume of cases. The rapid pace of China’s economic and social development is fueling a surge in the number of court cases judges handle, with one district court in Beijing receiving a record 40,000 cases last year.

The judges visted the U.S. Supreme Court as part of the IFES' Judicial Exchage Program.

The majority of these cases are civil and commercial, such as a conflict between two companies or an individual trying to collect a claim from an insurance company. The courts are also seeing a rise in private property cases, which follows China’s decision in 2004 to amend its constitution to include some protections for private property.

Lang said China will need to increase the caliber of its judges in order to ensure they can handle a large number of new and complicated cases. In addition, China is looking at best practices in addressing gaps in court resources between the urban eastern coastal provinces and the less developed west.

While the two judicial systems face similar challenges, there are key differences. China’s system is organized under the central government with all courts using the same laws, while the United States has both federal and state court systems. In addition, China has a centralized system of training colleges to prepare new judges and provide judges with continuing education throughout their careers.

Du said he could see the U.S. rationale for having state courts, in that the courts have power to tailor their rulings to the local situation. However, he also observed that having such diversity in the courts could negatively affect the overall efficiency of the system.

At the end of their U.S. program, the judges made a presentation at IFES titled “Judicial Reform in China.”