No, there is no need to abolish all laws. Give you a number and you will find it absolutely impossible to recite it. Up to now, there are 226 laws in the legal system of China. Exceeding the provisions of 1400. Therefore, if you think about your back, it is estimated that it will be useless to knock all your life. Lawyers mainly focus on the ability to analyze and solve problems, and there are also items in the judicial examination. It is impossible for you to recite the law. I guess you mentioned any law casually when you watched the lawyer's defense on TV. In fact, what is shown on TV is only the scene of defense. Moreover, defense is a kind of ability, and the content also requires lawyers to prepare their homework in the early stage. Generally, when you encounter a case, you first understand the case and the legal scope involved, then you start to prepare legal documents, that is, check them, then you start to analyze them, then you communicate with the parties to confirm them, and then you start to go through the judicial procedures of the court. Similarly, the court also judges the case by consulting the corresponding laws and regulations. It is also through the early communication with the lawyers of both sides that the lawyers of both sides should submit the sorted documents for trial, and the court will make a judgment before the trial. The court is not called a judgment, but a trial, which means to review legal documents and clarify the facts of the case. It should be pointed out that the law only gives a relatively just judgment, not absolute justice, because the law is also made by people. If the justice of the law itself is controversial, then there is something wrong with the law itself. Of course, this kind of controversy is also within the allowable range. The court only makes a ruling based on the materials and then chooses the appropriate supplement. Defense is a process leading to judgment. So we need a jury. The main function of the jury is to make various verdicts and then give them to the judge for summary. The judge will adopt a majority ruling for collegiate bench, and after the collegiate bench agrees, the judge will read out the ruling. It's as simple as that, it's not illegal, and it's not who has the final say, but a relatively fair result.
It seems that the problem has passed for a long time, and it doesn't matter whether it is adopted or not. I just saw a lot of unprofessional answers, and I think you should take fewer detours.