（Abstract）

While the trial system reform has not been completed，how to reasonably make useof the limited judicial resources and ensure the judicial justice have gradually aroused the public attention. Under the present conditions and possibilities，two reforms are necessary and workable. The first is to gradually develop theconcept of priority procedural justice at the ideological level，and the second isto simplify the summary procedure and increase its application scope，and improve the ordinary criminal procedure and narrow its application scope at the system level.

Firstly，with regard to the reform at the ideological level，the concept of priority procedural equity shall be gradually set up. Basically，the Chinesepeople take the substantial equity as a priority. However，in modern litigationtheory，giving procedural equity rather than substantial equity priority is aprinciple without doubt.

The procedural equity includes two contents. One is anyone can not be a judge in a case involving himself or herself；another is that parties involving ina case have opportunities to state their own opinions and to understand opinionsof the other parties. In fact，basic requirements for the procedural equity arevery simple：the parties involving in a case take the proceedings of a lawsuitas unquestionable. The significance of the procedural equity does not only exclude factors which might undermine the impartial judgments，but also show that impartiality of judgments is unquestionable.

Justice is the last defense of the equity，no matter what the result it is，the parties involving in the case have to accept it，otherwise，the existing legal order might be denied and violated. The justice certainly takes the priorityprocedural equity as the highest value. When we choose the litigation，actually，we have made up our minds to do our utmost and to accept a judgment whether itis satisfactory or not. No matter how we improve the judicial system，the firsttask of the judicial process is to realize the procedural equity instead of substantial equity. While pursuing the equity，we shall take account of efficiency.A wise alternative is to make an adequate balance between the equity and the efficiency，rather than pursuing one of them. It is not wise to seek impracticalsubjective truth. The modern litigation system emphasizes exclusion of variousfactors that might lead to inequity at the procedural design level，opposes to establish the judicial equity on the morals of the judicial officials. In China，the traditional judicial trend of moral idealism has not only prevented our efforts to eliminate the unfair system，but also encouraged people to pursuit of the substantial equity endlessly. Therefore，this kind of legal culture which goesagainst the modern rule of law principle falls into the scope of the reform.

Generally speaking，the procedural equity is the foundation and guaranteeof the substantial equity，and the substantial equity is the result and reflection of the procedural equity. The priority given to procedural equity is fundamentally because that we have to admit the limitedness of people’s cognitive capacity under specific historical conditions，which determines the limitedness of the dispute settlement capacities. Now that the dispute settlement capacities arelimited，we’d better accept the limited substantial equity rather than waitingfor the full substantial equity.

There’re roughly two categories of litigation theories，one emphasizes thesubstantial equity and another focuses on the procedural equity. The Chinese litigation tradition emphasizes the substantial equity. With the gradual development of market economy and the promotion of rule of law，the Chinese litigation tradition can no longer meet the requirements for the social progress and political democratization，neither meet the demands of the public for the judicialjudgment and equity. Consequently，review and improvement of different kinds of litigation systems has become an inevitable historical trend.

At the system level，the summary procedure shall be simplified and its application scope shall be expanded，whereas the ordinary criminal procedure shall be improved and its application scope shall be narrowed down. At present，thereare two major related problems in the Chinese criminal judicial system：one is equalitarianism in utilization of the judicial resources，which the ordinary procedure is applied in most cases；another is rule by men in the procedural design，i. e. the ordinary procedure has not been fully developed to resist differentpolitical and social interference into the judiciary and to guarantee the independent trial and judicial equity.

Before the middle of the 20^th century，the American judicial system facedthree difficulties：first，the cases waiting for adjudication are piled mountain-high；second，the high judicial expenditures；third，sentence of “not guilty”remains a high rate. “Plea bargain” started in the 1920s played a great role in solving the above problems. How far is the “plea bargaining” from us？In additionto some specific system arrangements（such as restrictive regulations and requirements），there’re only two steps to go：one is to recognize that the prosecutorial organs enjoy the right to make a sentence proposal，the other is that the judges enjoy the right to decide application of the special summary procedure，（which is more simple than the current summary procedure and is similar to the approval procedure of American “plea bargaining”）. However，this isn’t to say that the balanced utilization of the judicial resources in Chinese criminal proceedingsis reasonable and efficient.

Therefore，the major problem encountered at the moment is that there are great limitations on the application scope of the procedure lying between the ordinary procedure and the summary procedure，and failure of convincing logic for guaranteeing the judicial equity in the procedure. I personally believe，the prerequisite for the actual implementation of the summary procedure in relation with the conviction of the crimes is that procuratorial organs have the right to makesentence proposal，which the summary procedure may play a great role.

Translated by Jiangqian

Edited by Li Xixia