[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, "executing as few people as possible and exercising caution in executing those who must be executed" is the consistent death penalty policy that China has been adhering to: "executing as few people as possible" refers to strictly controlling the number of death penalty applications, and resolutely not executing those who can be spared; "exerting caution in executing those who must be executed" refers to strictly controlling the procedures — the highest standards of evidence for death penalty cases, all second-instance trials being held in court, and the death penalty approval power being exercised by the Supreme People's Court. Its full expression is "retaining the death penalty, strictly controlling it, and exercising caution in applying it", which is not to abolish the death penalty, but to put the death penalty under the strictest control.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

When major cases are sentenced and reported in the media, the public often wonders: Why are some people sentenced to immediate execution, others to a suspended death sentence, and still others to life imprisonment, despite equally serious circumstances? What role does the "principle of sparing and exercising caution in sentencing" play in this? Understanding this policy is essential to understanding the sentencing logic of death penalty cases and the real scope of death penalty defense.

II. Key points of dispute

First, the historical context of the policy: the transition from the era of "strike hard" to the inclusion of human rights protection in the Constitution. Second, the substantive boundaries: the criteria for determining "extremely serious crimes". Third, the positioning of suspended execution of the death penalty: an independent type of punishment rather than "execution after a two-year reprieve". Fourth, procedural safeguards: the transfer of the right of review to the Supreme Court and the strict application of evidence rules.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Liu LiqiangAttorney (Practice License No.: 11101200910454358, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ). Let's first examine the historical context: The policy gene of "sparing executions and exercising caution in applying the death penalty" can be traced back to the "insisting on sparing arrests and exercising caution in applying the death penalty" guideline in the 1950s. In 2004, "the state respects and guarantees human rights" was written into the Constitution, and in 2007, the authority to approve death sentences was unified under the Supreme People's Court, marking the most stringent procedural gateway for "sparing executions" - since then, the number of death sentences applied has continued to decline. The Eighth and Ninth Amendments to the Criminal Law successively abolished a number of death penalty offenses for non-violent economic crimes, and the current death penalty offenses are concentrated in intentional homicide, robbery, drug trafficking, and other serious violent and drug-related crimes. On substantive standards: The death penalty is only applicable to criminals who have committed extremely serious crimes - this is explicitly stated in Article 48 of the Criminal Law. "Extremely serious" must be comprehensively evaluated from the nature of the crime, the means of commission, the consequences, the subjective malice, and the personal dangerousness. The existence of the death penalty in the statutory penalty does not necessarily mean it must be applied: recidivism, particularly cruel means, and particularly serious consequences are aggravating factors, while voluntary surrender, meritorious service, confession, active compensation and obtaining forgiveness, and the victim's fault are mitigating factors. Sentencing is a contest of evidence on both sides. The positioning of the death-row reprieve must be clarified: sentencing to death with a two-year reprieve is an independent type of punishment, not "waiting two years to execute" - those who do not commit intentional crimes during the reprieve period will have their sentences reduced to life imprisonment after two years, and those with significant meritorious service will have their sentences reduced to fixed-term imprisonment. In practice, the vast majority of death-row reprieve cases will not ultimately result in executions, so "striving for death-row reprieve" itself is the most important practical goal of death penalty defense. List of procedural safeguards: The most stringent requirements for evidence in death penalty cases - strict adherence to the principle of evidence-based adjudication and reasonable doubt standards; zero tolerance for illegal evidence in cases of torture and coercion; all second-instance cases must be heard in court; the Supreme People's Court interrogates defendants in the review stage, and lawyers' requests must be heard. Lawyers can submit written defense opinions in the review stage - this is the last line of defense and the most easily overlooked aspect by families. Applied to defense practice: The scope of death penalty cases lies in the extreme exploration of mitigating circumstances (facilitating compensation and obtaining forgiveness, proving the victim's fault), the extreme exercise of procedural rights (excluding illegal evidence, applying for expert assistants), and deepening opinions in the review stage. Each link must be planned in advance.

IV. Practical Suggestions and Legal Basis

The first step is to thoroughly understand the policy: grasp the judicial guidance of "retaining the death penalty, exercising strict control, and applying it with caution". The second step is to calculate the sentence: list and compare the aggravating and mitigating circumstances item by item. The third step is to focus on the procedure: prioritize advancing the legality of evidence and applications for exclusion. The fourth step is to ensure review: submit a complete plan for lawyers' opinions during the death penalty review stage. The main legal basis includes Articles 48 to 51 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China on the death penalty review procedure, and the relevant regulations of the Supreme People's Court on death penalty review and evidence review. The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective provisions.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Here's the translation of the Chinese sentence into English, with a detailed explanation: Three key points to understand the policy: "Reducing executions" refers to quantitative control; "Carefully executing" emphasizes procedural safeguards; and "Death with reprieve" is an independent type of punishment, not "a deferral of execution". The main battlefield for death penalty defense lies in mitigating circumstances and procedural rights, rather than emotional appeals in court. The review stage is the final line of defense. The earlier and more thorough the lawyer's submissions are, the better the chances of success. For defense in death penalty cases, please contact us via the following channels:Criminal defense and criminal case filingFor obtaining a comprehensive solution for the service, you can refer to the consultation on compensation and understanding for homicide casesPersonal injury and medical disputesThe panel, involving the determination of the victim's fault, can be combined with other evidence to form a comprehensive judgment.Specialised legal servicesFor reference, please refer to the sections related to the second-instance and retrial proceduresCreditor's rights and debts, and enforcement casesPlate consultation.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: What is the difference between a suspended death sentence and the immediate execution of the death penalty?

The death penalty with a reprieve is an independent type of punishment. If the offender does not commit any intentional crimes during the two-year reprieve period, the sentence will be reduced to life imprisonment or fixed-term imprisonment. The vast majority of death penalty with a reprieve cases will not be executed; the death penalty will be executed immediately after being approved by the Supreme People's Court.

Q2: Who approves the death penalty?

The approval power shall be exercised by the Supreme People's Court in a unified manner. Before the approval, any death penalty judgment shall not take effect in execution.

Q3: Which crimes may result in the death penalty?

The focus is on serious violent and drug-related crimes such as intentional homicide, robbery, kidnapping resulting in death, and drug trafficking. Most of the death penalty crimes related to economic crimes have been abolished through amendments to the Criminal Law.

Q4: Can a person who surrenders to the authorities necessarily avoid the death penalty?

Surrendering oneself to the authorities is a statutory mitigating circumstance, but it does not necessarily lead to a death sentence being waived. The court will make a comprehensive judgment based on the severity of the crime. The combination of surrendering oneself to the authorities and actively making compensation and reaching a settlement with the victim has a significant mitigating effect.

Q5: What can lawyers do during the review stage of the death penalty case?

You can submit a written defense opinion to the Supreme Court, and the court will listen to the lawyer's opinion upon request. The opinion should focus on the sentencing circumstances and evidence issues in a systematic way, and the earlier you prepare, the more fully prepared you will be.

The above content is based on the judicial practices in the Beijing area. The facts of individual cases and the jurisdiction of the court may affect the conclusions. Welcome to consult Henglu Law Firm for specific cases.

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

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and publicly available 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.