[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, the impact is substantial: taking a lenient and strict approach and exercising caution in sentencing to death are important directions of China's criminal policy. It requires strict control over the immediate execution of the death penalty, and those who can be sentenced to death but not necessarily executed should not be sentenced to death. In terms of procedure, cases involving the immediate execution of the death penalty shall be approved by the Supreme People's Court. After review, the Supreme Court shall make a decision on whether to approve or not to approve the execution. Those who are not approved may be sent back for retrial or be given a different sentence. During the review, the defendant shall be interrogated, and the defense lawyer's opinions shall be heard if requested. The policy is reflected in both substantive and procedural aspects: on the substantive side, strictly controlling the conditions for applying the death penalty and attaching importance to circumstances such as voluntary surrender and meritorious service and the victim's forgiveness; on the procedural side, through review, possible errors in the sentencing of the death penalty are avoided as much as possible.

I. Problem background and typical scenarios

After the defendant was sentenced to death in the first instance, the family members were most concerned about two things: whether there was still a chance for appeal and what they could do during the review stage. Some people mistakenly believe that once the verdict is handed down, there's nothing they can do about it, while others don't understand whether the review is just a formality. The review of death penalty cases is the last checkpoint in death penalty cases. Only by understanding how the policy of minimizing and exercising caution in sentencing death penalty is implemented in the review process can we seize the last chance.

II. Key points of contention

First, who conducts the review of the death penalty and how is it initiated. Second, the consequences of not approving the death penalty. Third, the role of defense lawyers in the review stage. Fourth, common circumstances that affect whether the death penalty is approved or not.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

First level: The subject and procedure of review: The death penalty is approved by the Supreme People's Court; for first-instance cases sentenced to death by intermediate people's courts where the defendant does not appeal, the case shall be reviewed by the higher people's court and then submitted to the Supreme People's Court for approval; for first-instance cases sentenced to death by higher people's courts where the defendant does not appeal, and for second-instance cases sentenced to death, they shall all be submitted to the Supreme People's Court for approval. Second level: Consequences of non-approval: The Supreme People's Court shall review death penalty cases and make a decision to approve or not approve the death penalty; for cases where the death penalty is not approved, the Supreme People's Court may send them back for retrial or issue a modified judgment; this procedure provides institutional space for correcting possible errors and ensuring that the death penalty is applied sparingly and with caution. Third level: The role of defense lawyers: When reviewing death penalty cases, the Supreme People's Court shall interrogate the defendant and, if requested by the defense lawyer, shall listen to their opinions; the defense lawyer may submit new evidence and sentencing circumstances during the review stage, and argue why the death penalty should not be approved, including doubts about the facts, insufficient evidence, a relatively minor role in a joint crime, voluntary surrender or meritorious service, the victim's forgiveness, and signs of remorse. Fourth level: Specific implementation of the policy: The principle of "sparingly and cautiously applying the death penalty" emphasizes strict control over the immediate execution of the death penalty, focusing on distinguishing the specific circumstances of the case and the defendant's subjective malice and personal dangerousness. Cases with statutory or discretionary mitigating circumstances or evidence with doubts often become important targets for seeking non-approval; however, it should be noted that the policy does not mean "inevitably not applying the death penalty". Cases that seriously endanger public security or involve extremely serious crimes will still be approved according to law, so defense should be based on facts and evidence. Attorney Liu Liqiang of our firm has accumulated experience in defending and representing clients in serious crimes such as intentional homicide, and has always focused on facts, evidence, and sentencing circumstances in his work.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The first step is to promptly engage a professional lawyer during the review stage to sort out the doubts in the facts and evidence. The second step is to organize materials around statutory and discretionary mitigating circumstances, such as voluntary surrender and meritorious service, repentance, and the victim's forgiveness. The third step is for the defense lawyer to put forward requirements and submit written opinions to strive for a full statement during the review stage. The fourth step is to pay attention to the follow-up remedies and appeal paths after the approval result. Main legal basis: Article 246 of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2018) regarding the provisions that the death penalty shall be approved by the Supreme People's Court; Article 250 regarding the provisions that after the review, the court shall make a decision on approval or disapproval, and if disapproved, it may send the case back for retrial or change the verdict; Article 251 regarding the provisions that during the review, the defendant and the defense lawyer shall be interrogated and their opinions shall be heard; the specific application shall be subject to the currently effective provisions.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Advice

The three principles of death penalty review are as follows: the death penalty must be approved by the Supreme People's Court, and the review is the last safeguard; if the approval is not granted, the case can be sent back for retrial or a change of sentence, which is reflected in the policy of "not executing those who could be executed but are not"; during the review stage, the defendant should be interrogated and the defense lawyer's opinions should be heard, and the evidence and sentencing circumstances are crucial. For cases involving serious crime defense and death penalty review, legal assistance can be obtained through the following channels:Criminal defenseThe service provides a comprehensive solution that integrates evidence and appraisalPersonal injury and medical disputesFor cases involving civil litigation, please refer to the relevant provisions on plates.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcementFor columns involving special handling, you can consult us for adviceSpecial servicesTeam.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Who approves the review of the death penalty?

The death penalty shall be approved by the Supreme People's Court; cases of suspended execution of the death penalty shall be approved by the higher people's courts.

Q2: What will happen if the death penalty is not approved?

The Supreme People's Court may remand the case for retrial or issue a new judgment.

Q3: What can lawyers do during the review stage?

The defense attorney may file a request and submit opinions, arguing that the death penalty should not be approved based on the facts, evidence, and sentencing circumstances.

Q4: Does "less killing and exercising caution in killing" mean not sentencing someone to death?

No. It strictly controls the immediate execution of the death penalty, but cases of extremely serious crimes will still be approved according to the law.

Q5: Which plot elements are conducive to obtaining disapproval?

Legal or discretionary mitigating circumstances, such as doubts about the facts or evidence, playing a minor role in a joint crime, surrendering voluntarily and making meritorious contributions, showing remorse, and obtaining the victim's forgiveness.

This article is written based on the common judicial interpretation in the Beijing area. If the case occurs in other regions, it is recommended to consult local lawyers to verify the regional differences.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence materials to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Criminal defense legal services·Beijing Henglue Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current laws and regulations and public adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.