The publication of decided cases, beginning in 1985, in the Gazette of the Supreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China [hereinafter the Gazette] has attracted much attention from Western scholars. Some have regarded it as a valuable tool for understanding developments in the Chinese legal system in post-Mao China. Some scholars commented, on the one hand, that the Gazette is "[p]robably the most important new publication on law" in China, since it is the first time that the People's Republic has published its decided cases. On the other hand, they expressed serious doubts as to "whether these cases have the force of precedents," and "will be cited by judges in their decisions." The conclusion these scholars reached was that "[t]hese published decisions do not ... carry the force of precedent. They will be used only as models to help less experienced judges learn methods of legal reasoning." This article will show that decisions reported in the Gazette may actually carry force as precedents, depending on the comments the Court makes as well as on the sensitivity of the issues involved. Notwithstanding the fact that the published opinions are heavily edited, that they are not allowed to be cited in lower court decisions, and that they usually include little or no legal reasoning, decisions reported in the Gazette may shape the development of the law by providing "guidance" to lower courts in adjudicating cases with similar factual situations or with similar issues of law. To borrow a phrase the late Justice Jackson used to describe the function of precedents in the United States, the decisions reported in the Gazette may function in the Chinese context as "a weather vane showing which way the judicial wind is blowing." This is so even though the judicial wind in China is hardly forceful outside legal circles.

Part II of this article briefly examines the historical role played by judicial decisions, both before and after the founding of the People's Republic. Part III examines the dispute over whether cases reported in the Gazette merely provide "guidance" or serve as binding "precedents." Following a description of the way court decisions are chosen, edited, and eventually printed in the Gazette, this article analyzes the actual function such decisions play in the Chinese judicial process. It then concludes with a discussion of the way in which future evolution of case law in China as likely to be decisively influenced by institutional developments in the broader political-legal arena.