In a tragic event that took place last November, China experienced its most deadly mass murder of the previous ten years. Only a mere seventy days afterward, on a Monday, the criminal responsible for the horrendous event, along with another criminal responsible for another separate violent episode, was executed. While this rapid process was viewed positively by most Chinese social media users, it invited scrutiny from legal professionals and experts. They voiced concerns over the potential efficacy of such hasty executions in deterring future similar acts of violence.
The perpetrator, Fan Weiqiu, aged 62, horrifyingly used his vehicle as a weapon, and deliberately drove it into a mass of unsuspecting people surrounding Zhuhai Stadium located in Guangdong province. The tragic episode resulted in the loss of 35 lives, and left 43 people with injuries of varying degrees. During his court appearance on the 27th of December, Fan disclosed that his motivation for carrying out the horrendous act was discontent with the results of his divorce settlement.
Such motivations were described by the court not only as extraordinarily detestable, but also his heinous act was deemed particularly severe due to its destructive impact. Consequently, Fan was sentenced to death on the very day of his trial. However, the decision sparked mixed responses online, with a small number of internet users questioning the appropriateness of the death penalty.
The second individual who was executed on the same Monday was Xu Jiajin, a former student held guilty for the demise of eight people and for injuries inflicted on 17 others. The troubling attack was committed at his former Technical school, located in Wuxi. At just 21 years old, Xu sought revenge after underperforming in his final examination which subsequently denied him his graduation certificate.
Curiously, the execution of Xu occurred within a surprisingly short span of 66 days, following his sentencing and the incident itself. This pattern of a rapid progression from the criminal act, to sentencing and then execution within fewer than three months in both cases has led some legal scholars to criticize China’s judicial practices, raising legitimate questions about its credibility and fairness.
Often perpetrators of these shocking ‘revenge crimes’, like Fan and Xu, are motivated to act out due to perceived legal injustices or as a result of disillusionment from unsuccessful attempts to petition government authorities. The petition process, aimed to give ordinary Chinese citizens the ability to voice their grievances to local authorities, is notorious for its extremely low success rate.
These two particular murder cases put a spotlight on a larger issue–the inability of the Chinese judicial system to tackle root causes of such incidents and prevent the escalation of violence. Interestingly, it’s noted that there were talks of reforming the death penalty before President Xi Jinping’s administration, although these discussions appear to have halted under his leadership.
The proposed reforms included granting the highest court of China the authority to review death penalty verdicts in order to maintain fairness and consistency in their application. Various criminals, including Fan and Xu, have motivations rooted in social and economic discontent, making it important to address these underlining issues.
However, discussing and tackling these societal problems is often seen as a restricted area by the Chinese Communist Party. They fear that bringing attention to larger, systemic issues may potentially destabilize their position of control and authority.
These two disturbing cases of murder highlight another aspect of China’s legal system – its political utility. From this perspective, the quick progression of these cases serves two purposes: Firstly, it demonstrates to the public that the state is proactive in maintaining public safety. Secondly, by concluding these cases rapidly, it intends to curtail public discussion on the broader context of these crimes, effectively silencing debates on prevailing social issues linked to China’s economic downturn.
The Chinese legal system embodies two contrasting extremes. On one end of the spectrum, individuals advocating for human rights who have been apprehended often face long waiting periods – sometimes years, before their cases reach the courtroom.
Contrarily, individuals like Fan and Xu who caused mass harm, were rapidly brought before the court; their lives ended by execution a short period – less than three months, after their crimes. This duality presents a stark contrast and raises important questions about the philosophy, fairness, and purpose underlying China’s current approach to justice.