Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Sentencing Disparities in Corruption Cases in China

Bibliographic Data

ID12423175
AuthorsTing Gong (0000-0001-9927-886X, City University of Hong Kong and Fudan University, China), Shiru Wang (0000-0003-2438-2341, Hang Seng Management College, Hong Kong), Hui Li (0000-0001-9355-1116, Fudan University, corresponding author)
Year2018
Volume28
Issue116
Pages245-259
Publication date2018-09-24
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Contemporary China (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1067-0564 • E-ISSN: 1469-9400
PublisherRoutledge (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10670564.2018.1511395
OpenAlexW2893413699
LanguageEN
Citations received9

In China, the dramatic increase in the number of trials and convictions of corrupt officials leads to the question of how they were sentenced and by what criteria. The puzzle is, in particular, to what extent judicial discretion plays a role in sentencing corrupt officials and, if judicial discretion does exist, how the discretionary power is exercised. This article addresses these questions based on 7304 court judgments in 2014–15, which were obtained from the official website of the Supreme People’s Court. The authors’ analysis reveals strong evidence of the presence of a high level of judicial discretion and considerable inconsistency in court judgments. This article further explores the possible explanations for sentencing disparities in corruption cases to show how extra-judicial factors may influence judicial decisions

China · Discretion · Judicial discretion · Judicial review · Language change · Political science · Power (physics · Supreme court · Corruption and Economic Development · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems

  • Bribery as a Third Path to Power?

    Open Access•Jiangnan Zhu•Bribery as a Third Path to Power?•2026

  • Tigers vs. flies

    Open Access•Xin Jiang, Shan Cui et al.•Crime Law and Social Change•2023

  • Fiscal pressure and judicial decisions

    Open Access•Hongli Chu, Shengmin Sun et al.•International Review of Law and…•2024

  • Sex, Age, Education, Marital Status, Number of Children, and Employment – the Impact of Extralegal Factors on Sentencing Disparities

    Kamil Mamak, Joanna Dudek et al.•European Journal of Crime…•2022

  • Rural to urban migration, crime, and sentencing disparities in Guangdong, China

    Open Access•Ziwei Qi•International journal of law,…•2020

  • Out of China’s Reach

    Jiangnan Zhu•The China Journal•2021

  • Are sentencing disparities unavoidable? Lessons from centralized judicial training

    Open Access•Andrzej Uhl, Kamil Mamak•Journal of Criminal Justice•2026

  • Guanxi Culture, Corruption and Patronage

    Open Access•Zhihui Fu, Qing Tian et al.•Sociology•2025

  • Does Poverty Relief Breed Corruption? An Evaluation of China’s Poverty Alleviation Program

    Open Access•Kai Wang•Journal of Chinese Political…•2022

Unique citing works9
Citations per year1,5
Citation span2020 - 2026 (7)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 9

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae