Li Shaoping: Clarify the legal status of Internet courts

Introduction: During the two sessions of the country this year, Li Shaoping, member of the Standing Committee of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, vice president of the Supreme People's Court, and chief judge of the Fifth Circuit Court proposed that in order to give full play to the functions of Internet courts, they should further clarify their status as specialized courts and improve relevant systems and mechanisms. Crack some institutional, mechanism, and bottleneck problems in its development.

The establishment of Internet courts is a major decision-making arrangement of the Party Central Committee, and it is also a major institutional innovation for the judiciary to actively adapt to the development trend of the Internet.

On August 18, 2017, the Hangzhou Internet Court was formally established. On September 9 and September 28, 2018, Beijing Internet Court and Guangzhou Internet Court were unveiled successively.

Li Shaoping, member of the Standing Committee of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, vice president of the Supreme People's Court, and president of the Fifth Circuit Court, pointed out that the Hangzhou Internet Court has been established and operated for more than two years, and the Beijing and Guangzhou Internet Courts have been established and operated for more than a year. It has been widely concerned and fully affirmed by all parties at home and abroad.

U.S. Senators Ask the Department of Justice to Investigate the FTX Incident: Jinse Finance reported that U.S. Democratic Senators Elizabeth Warren and Sheldon Whitehouse wrote to the Department of Justice on Wednesday, urging Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate the fraudulent and illegal practices in the FTX collapse, and demanded that the company Former CEO Sam Bankman-Fried and other executives are being held accountable "to the fullest extent of the law".

The senators wrote that FTX's downfall was not only the result of sloppy business and management practices, but appeared to be the result of deliberate and fraudulent tactics employed by Bankman-Fried and other FTX executives for personal gain. In addition to having a knock-on effect on the broader cryptocurrency industry, Warren and Whitehouse expressed concern in the letter about the impact of FTX's implosion on retail investors, who they said FTX's huge advertising placements and celebrity endorsements brought created a "false sense of security and an illusion of legitimacy". [2022/11/24 8:02:07]

"The three Internet courts adhere to the people-centered development idea, explore the construction of new litigation rules that meet the needs of the Internet era, and promote the rule of law in cyberspace governance by trying various Internet cases according to law, and strengthen my country's international discourse power in cyberspace governance. and the right to make rules.” Li Shaoping said in an interview with reporters.

Report: The merger may promote Ethereum to become a "global institutional-level asset": Jinse Finance reported that a recent Bloomberg Intelligence research report stated that the long-awaited merger of Ethereum will serve as a catalyst for events that may transform Ethereum into \ "Global Institutional Grade Assets\". The ethereum ecosystem has seen a strong recovery after its May 21 peak, “suggesting that the asset may be mispriced,” the report said.

Additionally, according to the report, Ethereum has outperformed relative to the last bear market as well as Bitcoin on several key adoption metrics that are highly correlated with price, including active-ethexc users, addresses with non-zero balances, and transactions. (Finbold)[2022/8/4 12:01:45]

"As a reform pilot, the Internet Court is a grassroots court with centralized jurisdiction over specific types of Internet cases. It mainly implements the new mechanism of "online trial of online cases". It has formed a characteristic experience that meets the requirements of the Internet era." Member Li Shaoping said, "In particular, the Internet Court has tried a number of Internet cases with prominent Internet characteristics, complex legal relations, and strong professional and technical aspects, and has defined the rights of cyberspace according to the law. Internet behavior rules, continuous improvement of Internet governance rules, and further guarantee the healthy development of new Internet business forms.”

PeckShield: It is suspected that the address related to Three Arrows Capital was liquidated again for 3346 ETH: According to news on June 15, PeckShield monitoring showed that it is speculated that the address related to Three Arrows Capital (0x716034C25D9Fb4b38c837aFe417B7f2b9af3E9AE) was once again liquidated at 16:48 Beijing time 3346 ETH were liquidated. [2022/6/15 4:29:02]

At the same time, member Li Shaoping pointed out that due to the unclear legal status of Internet courts, there are still some institutional, mechanism, and bottleneck problems in the development.

First, the jurisdiction of Internet courts urgently needs to be optimized. "The novelty, complexity, and cross-regional nature of Internet disputes make the jurisdiction of cases complex." Li Shaoping said, for example, that in the Internet age, many new types of cases are difficult to be included in traditional civil causes of action, and cases involving multiple causes of action may be prosecuted. lead to jurisdictional conflicts. At the same time, Internet unfair competition and monopoly disputes are not included in the jurisdiction of Internet courts.

The Osmosis blockchain has stopped producing blocks, and developers are undergoing emergency maintenance: According to news on June 8, the Osmosis blockchain of the Cosmos ecological DEX project has stopped at a height of 4713064, and developers are undergoing emergency maintenance. Osmosis DEX and Wallet are unavailable until the fix is complete. [2022/6/8 4:10:45]

Second, the rules of litigation need to be improved. Member Li Shaoping pointed out that the traditional offline litigation rules are not compatible with the online litigation model commonly adopted by Internet courts, and it is necessary to re-understand and define the principle of judicial experience, further explore the rules of online litigation, and improve online court hearings, electronic evidence determination, and electronic service. litigation rules.

In addition, he emphasized that the construction of the platform is constrained by various factors and needs to be further promoted as a whole. For example, the docking and integration of internal and external network platforms. At the same time, the lack of professional and technical personnel, hidden dangers in data security, and the need to expand external data sharing channels need further improvement.

Member Li Shaoping believes that, judging from the trial practice of Internet courts, the scope of its case jurisdiction has gradually shifted from batch and simple cases to highly technical, highly complex, and novel types of cases, and the litigation rules and case-handling platforms that adapt to the requirements of the Internet era will gradually be established. Political significance and policy functions will become more prominent.

In order to give full play to the functions of Internet courts, member Li Shaoping suggested that the status of their specialized courts should be further clarified, and the following institutional mechanisms should be improved:

The first is to improve the overall pattern of Internet trials. Internet-related disputes are universal and normalized in the Internet age, and it is unreasonable and unfeasible for all Internet-related cases to be under the jurisdiction of Internet courts. The jurisdiction of Internet courts should develop in the direction of "specialization" and "sophistication", concentrate on the jurisdiction of novel types, difficult and complex Internet cases that have the significance of establishing rules, and improve the professionalism and specialization of trials. At the same time, in view of the characteristics of Internet disputes occurring online and breaking time and space, the jurisdiction of Internet courts should span municipal or provincial administrative divisions, focus on forming clearer and clearer legal application standards, and unify judicial rules in emerging fields. For ordinary Internet-related cases, the local courts will continue to hear them, improve the Internet trial organization system, and form a scientific and reasonable, hierarchical, and orderly connection Internet trial structure. It is recommended that the Legislative Affairs Committee of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress and other departments increase legislative support, study the division of jurisdiction between Internet courts and ordinary courts, clarify the status of Internet courts as specialized courts, and explore cross-administrative jurisdiction cases. For example, try to expand the jurisdiction of Beijing Internet Court, Hangzhou Internet Court, and Guangzhou Internet Court to Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, Yangtze River Delta, and Pearl River Delta, respectively, so as to achieve a reasonable layout of case jurisdiction.

The second is to promote the improvement of the online litigation rule system. Strengthen the exploration of online litigation in Internet courts, straighten out the litigation process, clarify operational norms, form a complete set of online litigation procedure rules such as jurisdiction, case filing, court hearing, service, electronic evidence cross-examination and certification, and execution, improve civil procedure rules, and eliminate online litigation from the system. There are institutional obstacles in case filing, electronic service, online court hearing, and electronic filing. It is recommended that the Legislative Affairs Committee of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, on the basis of authorizing the pilot reform of the separation of complex and simple civil litigation, summarize and evaluate in due course, revise and improve relevant electronic litigation rules, and promote the deep integration of Internet technology, trial methods, and litigation systems.

The third is to make overall plans to promote infrastructure construction and supporting guarantees. In view of the constraints on the construction of information platforms, we should promote the formulation of platform technical standards and data security standards, and increase the construction and supervision of unified litigation platforms. It is recommended that local party committees and governments increase supporting support for staffing, institutional setup, financial guarantees, and training of specialized personnel. It is recommended that the Central Cyberspace Administration of China take the lead in promoting the formulation of court system platform technology and data security standards, and coordinate courts, government agencies, and Internet companies to establish data co-governance and sharing platforms.

Recommended reading for this article:

President of the Supreme Court: A national unified judicial blockchain platform will be built in 2020

Tencent and Beijing Fangzheng Notary Office open the road to smart justice: from To G to To B, multiple business scenarios are applicable

Golden Observation｜Judicial applications are blooming everywhere, and blockchain technology is rapidly landing

Text | Our reporter Zhang Chunbo

Tags：

Ripple