Two legal experts talk to
The Economic Observer about the retrial of Xu Ting, who had his life sentence for ATM theft reduced to five years after a media outcry led the courts to reconsider:
When the case was returned to the lower court, the latter was under the impression that its superior was unhappy with the severe judgment, thus it started reviewing the case by arguing that the nature of "theft" in this case was unique as it was due to ATM malfunctioning. To alter the verdict, the lower court needed a legal ground, and found article 63 (2) of the Criminal Law that allowed the penalty to be mitigated based on unique circumstances of the case and with approval from the Supreme Court.
During the top legislative meets (in March), some higher court officials have openly commented through the media that the penalty on Xu was too harsh, this action is against the principle of judiciary independence, against the independence of the local court and the judge to carry out trial. Judicial proceeding should not blindly succumb to public pressure, however, it should pay attention to public opinion, this has been a practice in many countries.