47. On Guilt and Innocence:Better to let the guilty go free than to wrongly convict the innocent.

The gravest violation a state can commit against its citizens is to convict an innocent person and subject them to punishment. If such occurrences are extremely rare, it indicates the state's judicial system is profoundly incompetent. If they are widespread, it signifies the entire governance system has become so corrupt that it must be overthrown and rebuilt.

Democratic nations absolutely forbid the wrongful conviction of innocent citizens. Thus, the most fundamental and critical issue in judicial trials is guilt or innocence. On this matter, ancient Chinese texts state, "Better to let the guilty go free than to kill the innocent," while Western legal theory holds that "in doubt, acquit." Both assertions uphold the same judicial principle: "Better to let the guilty go free than to wrongly convict the innocent."

No nation can ever guarantee that not a single criminal will escape justice. In democratic, rule-of-law societies, some offenders will inevitably evade legal punishment. These criminals who slip through the net represent the necessary societal cost paid to protect the innocent from wrongful conviction. If the guilty are released for lack of sufficient evidence, the innocent are even less likely to be wrongfully convicted. Thus, the innocent occupy an absolutely secure position within the governance system of such a nation.

However, authoritarian regimes often adopt the principle of "neither letting a guilty person go free nor wrongfully convicting an innocent person" as their judicial philosophy. This idealized judicial principle aligns with the autocratic ruler's consistent portrayal of omnipotence to the populace and satisfies their need to use the judiciary to suppress dissent. For the autocratic ruler knows full well that this principle inevitably results in releasing a group of criminals and wrongfully convicting a group of innocent people. Among those criminals who slip through the net are precisely those the rulers wish to spare, while among the innocent wrongfully convicted are precisely those the rulers wish to target. This is the fundamental reason why autocratic rulers uniformly adhere to this flawed judicial principle.

To avoid wrongfully convicting the innocent, one must adhere to the principle of "crime and punishment defined by law." This principle means that whether an act constitutes a crime and how it should be punished must be explicitly stipulated by law beforehand. Any act not explicitly defined as a crime by law is not a crime and shall not be punished.

To prevent the innocent from being wrongfully accused, the principle of procedural justice must be upheld. This principle requires that when pursuing legal liability against citizens, the procedures explicitly prescribed by law must be strictly followed. If statutory procedures are violated, the outcome must be favorable to the citizen.

To prevent the innocent from being wrongfully accused, citizens' right to defense must be fully guaranteed. Beyond self-representation, citizens must have access to legal counsel. Regardless of circumstances, if a citizen cannot afford a lawyer, the state must appoint a public defender. When even the guilty receive legal representation, there is no need to fear the innocent going without.

To prevent the innocent from being wrongfully convicted, we should adopt the jury system practiced in Western democracies. The final determination of a citizen's guilt rests with the jury's vote. This system prevents judicial arbitrariness and ensures verdicts better align with public expectations. Naturally, not every case requires a jury trial. For cases with clear facts where the defendant voluntarily pleads guilty, jury participation is unnecessary to conserve judicial resources. Cases where the defendant pleads not guilty, or where the defendant pleads guilty but evidence is flawed, or where the defendant pleads guilty but faces the death penalty or life imprisonment, should all be tried by a jury.

In short, when the judicial system cannot punish every wrongdoer, it must ensure that no innocent person is wrongfully punished by the system.