C
10
3. The Scientific Character of the Formulation and Promulgation of Interpretation.
of its
Although it lacks the complexity
legislative work, supreme judicial interpretation should have
OWn scientifically based steps and procedures due to its importance in the national
administration of justice.
Supreme judicial interpretation should be based on છ combination of practice and theory. Practice involves using many different methods and channels to investigate and understand the practical situation in criminal justice work. In recent years this type of basic work has been done comparatively well. The SPP and SPC should also carry out research on the theoretical basis of their work. This research should be done in concert with other appropriate bodies, including the national legislative and administrative bodies and, if time permits, legal academics. This is especially important in the formulation of statements of legal interpretation issued as official documents (ie; those that are more general im scope). In recent years the theoretical basis of supreme judicial interpretation has been comparatively neglected, in particular the academics have been given insufficient attention.
opinions of legal
The language of supreme judicial interpretation should be precise
and specific. Its function is to clarify and render specific laws which are comparatively abstract and general in form and, moreover + to ensure the correct implementation of criminal law in practice. If such interpretation is unclear or not specific it can hardly be used a guide for the national administration of justice. On the contrary,
it will only add new confusion and difficulties.
as
Clarity means that the language used should show a clear cut point of view and should clearly delineate distinctions. Vague and ambiguous interpretation should be stopped. Specificity means that the language used should be detailed and precise so as to completely reveal the content of interpretation. Sweeping and abstract generalities should be strictly avoided. Ir recent years the language used in supreme judicial interpretation has been usually clear and specific, however a small number of interpretations have been too general and ambiguous.
The methods of promulgating supreme judicial interpretation also deserve inquiry. At present this interpretation reaches criminal justice organs through out the country by means of official document channels or by publication in 'internal ' publications. Only a very few documents of supreme judicial interpretation are published in 'public' journals such as the 'Supreme Court Gazette' or the 'China Legal News'. Interpretations which are not publicly available cannot be included in treatises for public use and critique. Furthermore, as the years gone by an increasing
number of unavailable interpretations havw accumulated, which has hampered the work of compiling interpretations and has made it difficult for legal