During China’s cultural revolution, China’s legal system came to a standstill.

Legal institutions didn’t function, law schools were closed and in the 1980’s China had to embark on a massive legal reconstruction process.

30 years on and the legal system is up and running, but critics argue it is well below that of international standards. In particular, many are critical of the lack of judicial independence.

Some of those who are most vocal come from a new breed of Chinese legal scholars.

These lawyers are they’re taking it upon themselves to try and amend the system, to make it more honest and accountable to the Chinese public.

Elise Potaka spoke with one of these legal crusaders.

When local media broke the story about migrant workers being used as slaves in brick kilns in Shanxi province, the Chinese public was outraged.

Two months on, and while the media reports have died down, the legal battle has only just begun.

“Many workers had been used as slaves in the kiln for two years. During that time the police had been there but did nothing to rescue them. We think the malpractice of the police is important in this case, so we’re representing these workers to try and get compensation.�

Xu Zhiyong is a lawyer and co-founder of the Open Constitution Initiative, a group aimed at making China’s legal system more open and accountable.

He has been involved in a number of high profile cases which highlight flaws in China’s judicial system.

Their first success was in 2003.

At the time, police in major cities could detain people and force them to return to their hometown if they didn’t carry the right identification.

A student, Sun Zhigang, was picked up by police and was bashed to death in the repatriation detention centre.

“After Sun Zhigang’s death, we petitioned the standing committee of the national people’s congress and we said the regulation – the detained repatriation regulation – violated the Chinese constitution. And we asked, as citizens, of the standing committee of the national people’s congress to review it. And two months later the state council abolished the regulation. So it’s a big success.�

Xu Zhiyong and his colleagues have also successfully lobbied for sentences to be shortened, like in the case of two Chinese newspaper staff who were jailed after reporting on sensitive issues.

But the battle to improve China’s legal system is difficult, especially given the close ties between state and judiciary.

Keith Hand is a senior research scholar at Yale’s China Law Centre.

“Courts are funded and judges are appointed by local governments, this creates an avenue for local interference. The second is that, China’s legal system is obviously under the direction and control of the Communist Party.�

Keith Hand says this lack of judicial independence means provincial governments may offer protectionism to local companies who’ve broken the law, because the companies are necessary to the local economy.

Citizens who want to sue a local government may also be prevented from doing so.

And he claims highly politicized cases may also encounter interference.

“For example, a murder, or a terrible crime that has really disturbed the community, there might be a lot of social pressure to convict someone, to respond to that case quickly. Or a case that is itself political – a local citizen that is protesting against the government, challenging a government decision in a politicised way. Maybe they post a story on the internet or maybe they lead a protest on the streets.�

Keith Hand says in this case there is likely to be influence on the courts to make sure that the result is favorable to the local power structures.

Another controversial issue is the use of forced confessions in sentencing. This is a problem which the Central government has publicly acknowledged, but is struggling to deal with.

Xu Zhiyong cites a case which has been ongoing since 1994, when four men were sentenced to death for killing two taxi drivers in Hebei province.

Xu Zhiyong maintains that the men were forced into making confessions, that the other evidence submitted was unclear. And that a lack of judicial independence has made the appeals process difficult.

“After the sentence, they appealed. But then they were sentenced to death by the same judge who handed down the initial sentence. They appealed again under the same circumstance – in total they’ve appealed five times.�

Xu Zhiyong has now taken on this case on behalf of the families. But for him, and other lawyers working to reform China’s legal system, it can be a risky job.

He himself has been detained by authorities after supporting the cause of another lawyer, Chen Guangcheng, who was trying to take local authorities to court over forced sterilisations in Shandong province.

The lawyer Chen Guangcheng is now serving four years in prison after he was charged with “disturbing the traffic�, and “destroying property�.

But Xu Zhiyong plays down concerns, saying that if you want to make a contribution to society, you have to face some risks.

And he says that in the next few years we should expect some big changes in China’s legal system, changes for the better.