Tongwang Focus: The Supreme People's Court's Opinion on Deeply Carrying Out the Rectification of False Litigation
Time:
2021-11-09
Author:
Source:
Supreme People's Court Judicial Case Research Institute
Visits:
31
Source: Judicial Case Research Institute of the Supreme People's Court
On November 9th, the Supreme People's Court held a press conference to release the 'Opinions of the Supreme People's Court on Deeply Carrying Out the Rectification of False Litigation' and typical cases of people's courts rectifying false litigation. He Xiaorong, Vice President of the Supreme People's Court, Zheng Xuelin, Director of the First Civil Division of the Supreme People's Court, and Ye Shaosheng, Deputy Director of the Fourth Criminal Division of the Supreme People's Court, attended the press conference. The press conference was presided over by Li Guangyu, spokesperson of the Supreme People's Court.
Press conference site
On November 9, the Supreme People's Court officially released the 'Opinions on Deeply Carrying Out the Rectification of False Litigation' (hereinafter referred to as the 'Opinions').
1. Background of Drafting the 'Opinions'
False litigation corrupts social conduct, hinders fair competition, damages judicial authority, and obstructs the construction of the rule of law, causing extremely bad social impact. Since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, the Supreme People's Court has adhered to Xi Jinping's Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era as guidance, deeply studied and implemented Xi Jinping's Thought on the Rule of Law, resolutely implemented the requirements of the Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee on increasing the punishment of false litigation, malicious litigation, and unreasonable entanglement, and taken multiple measures to severely rectify false litigation, mainly carrying out the following three aspects of work:
First, a sound system and mechanism for rectifying false litigation has been established. In response to the characteristics of false litigation in different periods, the Supreme People's Court has successively issued emergency notices on strictly reviewing various false litigations under real estate regulation policies, formulated guiding opinions on preventing and sanctioning false litigations, opinions on further strengthening the punishment of false litigation crimes, and issued normative documents such as judicial interpretations of the Civil Procedure Law, judicial interpretations of private lending, and judicial interpretations on handling criminal cases of false litigation, guiding courts across the country to actively and orderly carry out the rectification of false litigation.
Second, a large number of false litigation cases have been investigated and tried. From 2017 to 2020, courts nationwide investigated and dealt with 12,300 false litigation cases. In the series of 63 false litigation cases of execution objection lawsuits of Heilongjiang Hongji Milan Real Estate Development Co., Ltd., all were punished to the maximum extent, with a total fine of 63 million yuan; a total of 2,079 criminal cases involving false litigation were concluded, and the number of cases increased significantly year by year, including a series of major cases such as the Lin Moumou collusion with notaries to defraud the elderly of real estate 'routine loan' involving organized crime, and the Yu Moumou major 'online routine loan' special case, which effectively protected the legitimate rights and interests of the people.
Third, beneficial experiences in rectifying false litigation have been explored and accumulated. The Supreme People's Court promoted the case filing assistance system in courts nationwide; Zhejiang courts established a dishonest 'blacklist' and 'yellow list' for parties involved in false litigation, giving 3 to 5 years of credit punishment; Jiangsu High Court developed an intelligent early warning system for false litigation, making full use of the achievements of smart court construction to improve the quality and efficiency of rectification; courts in Beijing and other places told great truths through small cases and promoted litigation integrity by publishing typical cases and inviting NPC deputies to comment.
With the development of the economy and society and the strengthening of the rectification efforts of the people's courts, false litigation has also shown new characteristics and new tricks. In order to further deepen the rectification of false litigation, the Supreme People's Court has formulated the 'Opinions' based on the Civil Code, the Criminal Law, the Civil Procedure Law and other regulations on the basis of full research and extensive summary of practical experience.
2. Main Contents of the 'Opinions'
The 'Opinions' has 24 articles, which mainly stipulate the following six aspects:
First, the overall requirements of the work. Article 1 of the 'Opinions' emphasizes that rectifying false litigation is the political responsibility, legal responsibility and social responsibility of the people's courts. It is necessary to adhere to Xi Jinping's Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era as guidance, deeply study and implement Xi Jinping's Thought on the Rule of Law, continuously increase the rectification of false litigation, and vigorously promote the socialist core values of honesty and trustworthiness.
Second, strengthen identification and investigation. False litigation is extremely concealed, and how to identify it is crucial. Articles 2 to 4 of the 'Opinions' stipulate what circumstances constitute false litigation, providing a 'yardstick' for determining false litigation; summarize the eight major characteristics of false litigation, providing a guide for identifying false litigation; and list ten common types of false litigation, drawing the focus for rectifying false litigation. Articles 6 to 10 of the 'Opinions' construct a false litigation rectification mechanism that runs through the entire process of case filing, trial, and execution. It is necessary to strengthen case filing early warning, and if suspected false litigation is found, not only should the perpetrator be warned and reminded, but also the case handlers should be marked and reminded to strictly control the case entry; strengthen fact investigation, strictly control the case facts by investigating and collecting evidence ex officio and strictly investigating mediation agreements; strengthen execution review, focusing on investigating and dealing with false litigation in procedures such as execution objections, reconsiderations, and participation in distribution, and strictly control the case exit, striving not to let a false litigation come in and ensuring that a false litigation does not go out.
Third, rectify false litigation in key areas. Articles 11 to 15 of the 'Opinions' stipulate the requirements for rectifying false litigation in areas where execution objection lawsuits, private lending, and housing sales contracts are prone to occur. From 2017 to 2020, the average annual growth rate of investigating and dealing with false litigation in execution objection lawsuits was as high as 61.11%. The 'Opinions' requires strict review of the full case evidence of execution objection lawsuits, prudent treatment of party admissions, and strict prevention of parties from colluding maliciously to evade execution. Private lending has always been a high-incidence area of false litigation. In 2020, a total of 1,772 false private lending dispute cases were investigated and dealt with, accounting for 53.09% of the civil false litigation cases investigated and dealt with. The 'Opinions' requires strict review of illegal acts such as fabricating loans and falsely increasing principal through methods such as circular transfers and 'broken head interest', and strictly adhering to the judicial protection upper limit of private lending interest rates. In recent years, the phenomenon of evading housing purchase restrictions and sales restrictions policies through false litigation has been on the rise. The 'Opinions' stipulates that if a lawsuit is filed to fabricate a housing sales contract relationship for illegal purposes such as circumventing regulation and control policies, the contract shall be deemed invalid; if a purchase qualification is fabricated to participate in the judicial auction of real estate, the auction shall be deemed invalid.
Fourth, strict criminal accountability. The 'Opinions' puts forward three requirements for punishing criminal offenses involving false litigation: overall strictness, key targets, and criminal-civil coordination, strictly pursuing the criminal responsibility of perpetrators of false litigation; maintaining a high-pressure crackdown on illegal and criminal activities of 'routine loan' false litigation that the masses strongly reflect; and doing a good job in criminal-civil coordination in terms of information communication, clue transfer, and investigation and correction of falsehoods, not only cracking down on false litigation, but also providing legal relief to the rights of victims.
Fifth, strengthen team building. It takes a good blacksmith to make good steel. The key to addressing false litigation lies in creating a loyal, clean, and responsible court team. The 'Opinions' require timely organization of learning various economic and social policies, and improving the judicial capacity of judges to identify and deal with false litigation through case analysis, business exchanges, and judge training; strictly implement the judicial responsibility system, adhere to self-improvement, and deal seriously with court staff involved in false litigation in accordance with regulations and disciplines, and severely punish court staff who use their powers to commit false litigation crimes with others in accordance with the law.
Sixth, carry out systematic rectification. False litigation is a concentrated reflection of social dishonesty and requires systematic governance. The 'Opinions' require people's courts at all levels to strengthen communication and cooperation with various political and legal units to form a joint force for rectification; make full use of the achievements of smart court construction, strive to connect with the information database of credit reporting agencies, explore the construction of a 'blacklist' system for false litigation, and help build a social credit system; strengthen the publicity of the rule of law through case explanation and risk reminders, and cultivate a social atmosphere of honesty and trustworthiness.
Next, the Supreme People's Court will also formulate a series of judicial interpretations and judicial policies to further rectify false litigation, further tighten the cage of the system, compress the space for the existence of false litigation, achieve both temporary and permanent solutions to false litigation, and make due contributions to the construction of a credible society and a country ruled by law.
Fa [2021] No. 281
Supreme People's Court
Opinions on Deeply Carrying Out the Rectification of False Litigation
In order to further strengthen the rectification of false litigation, maintain judicial order, achieve judicial justice, establish judicial authority, protect the legitimate rights and interests of the parties, create a fair and competitive market environment, and promote the construction of social integrity, these opinions are formulated in accordance with the 'Civil Code of the People's Republic of China', 'Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China', 'Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China' and other regulations, combined with the actual work.
I. Improve ideological understanding and strengthen responsibility. Rectifying false litigation is a major task deployed by the Fourth Plenary Session of the Eighteenth Central Committee of the Party, and it is the political, legal, and social responsibility borne by the people's courts. It is of great significance for building a credible society, protecting the rights of the people, ensuring economic development, maintaining judicial authority, and building a country ruled by law. People's courts at all levels must adhere to Xi Jinping's thought on socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era as guidance, thoroughly study and implement Xi Jinping's thought on the rule of law, implement the principle of good faith in civil litigation in accordance with the law, adhere to the rigidity of the system, tighten the cage of the system, compress the space for the existence of false litigation, eliminate the soil for the breeding of false litigation, actively guide the people to litigate in good faith in accordance with the law, let the law secure the country and morality nourish the people, and vigorously promote the socialist core values of honesty and trustworthiness.
II. Accurately identify and deal with cases, and protect the right to sue in accordance with the law. Those who, alone or in collusion with others, maliciously collude, fabricate the basic facts of civil cases by means of forging evidence, making false statements, etc., fabricate civil disputes, file civil lawsuits with the people's court, damage national interests, social public interests, or the legitimate rights and interests of others, and obstruct judicial order, constitute false litigation. Applying to the people's court for enforcement of arbitration awards, mediation documents, and notarized creditor's documents made on the basis of fabricated facts, and raising objections to the enforcement target or applying to participate in the distribution of enforcement property on the basis of fabricated facts in the process of civil enforcement, also constitute false litigation. Litigation agents, witnesses, appraisers, notaries, etc. who collude with others to jointly carry out false litigation are false litigation actors. While rectifying false litigation, the parties' right to sue should be protected in accordance with the law. It is necessary to prevent the relaxation of the identification and handling of false litigation under the pretext of protecting the parties' right to sue, and also to prevent the failure to file a case under the pretext of rectifying false litigation, which damages the parties' right to sue.
III. Grasp the characteristics and manifestations, and do a good job in targeted rectification. People's courts at all levels should actively summarize judicial practice experience, accurately grasp the characteristics and manifestations of false litigation, and achieve precise treatment and targeted rectification. For cases with the following circumstances, we must be highly vigilant, strictly review, and effectively prevent false litigation: the facts and reasons on which the plaintiff's lawsuit is based are not in line with common sense; the amount of the subject matter of the lawsuit is seriously inconsistent with the plaintiff's economic situation; there are interested parties such as relatives and related parties between the parties, and the outcome of the lawsuit may involve the interests of persons outside the case; there is no substantial dispute over civil rights and interests between the parties, and there is no substantial adversarial debate in the lawsuit; the parties' admission is not in line with common sense; the parties are heavily in debt but transfer property at obviously unreasonable low prices, accept property at obviously unreasonable high prices, or waive property rights; the evidence for determining the facts of the case is insufficient, but the parties actively and quickly reach a mediation agreement and request the people's court to make a mediation document; the parties who have personally experienced the facts of the case cannot completely and accurately state the facts of the case or the statements are contradictory, etc.
IV. Focus on key areas and increase rectification efforts. Private lending disputes, lawsuits against enforcement objections, labor disputes, divorce property division disputes, property disputes of one party in divorce cases, corporate bankruptcy disputes, company division (merger) disputes, trademark disputes involving well-known trademarks, divorce, family property division, inheritance, and house sales contract disputes involving demolition, sales contracts and debt-for-goods disputes involving macro-control policies such as house purchase restrictions and motor vehicle allocation index control are areas where false litigation is prone to occur. For the above-mentioned cases, people's courts at all levels should focus on, strictly review, and increase the efforts to rectify false litigation.
V. Adhere to classified policies and improve the effectiveness of rectification. For cases identified by the people's court as false litigation, if the plaintiff applies for withdrawal of the lawsuit, it shall not be allowed, and the lawsuit request shall be rejected in accordance with Article 112 of the Civil Procedure Law. If the circumstances of false litigation are bad, the consequences are serious, or they participate in false litigation many times and create a series of false litigation cases, the punishment should be increased. If false litigation infringes upon the civil rights and interests of others, the actor shall bear the liability for compensation. If the people's court finds that false litigation is suspected of a crime in the process of handling the case, it shall transfer the relevant materials to the criminal investigation organ in a timely manner in accordance with the law; if public officials or employees of state-owned enterprises or institutions create or participate in false litigation, they shall be notified to the unit or supervision organ; if lawyers, grass-roots legal service workers, appraisers, notaries, etc. create or participate in false litigation, judicial suggestions may be issued to the relevant administrative departments and industry associations to urge timely administrative penalties or industry sanctions. Judicial staff who use their powers to participate in false litigation shall be severely punished in accordance with the law, and if they constitute a crime, they shall be investigated for criminal responsibility in accordance with the law.
VI. Strengthen case filing verification and provide warning reminders. During the case filing stage, information systems such as the case filing assistance system and China Judgments Online can be used to retrieve whether the parties involved in the case have related cases and verify the identity information of the parties. If a party has multiple pending cases, related cases, or other circumstances that may indicate a false lawsuit, the party's information should be carefully verified. If there is suspicion of a false lawsuit, the actor should be warned and reminded, and the case should be marked in the case handling system to remind the trial and enforcement departments to pay close attention to the risk of false lawsuits in the case.
VII. Adhere to multiple measures to ascertain the facts of the case. When hearing cases involving suspected false litigation, the parties and witnesses shall be required to sign a guarantee before questioning the parties or before the witnesses testify. The guarantee shall state that the statement is true and that the person is willing to accept punishment for any false statement. If the party bearing the burden of proof refuses to appear in court, refuses to accept questioning, or refuses to sign a guarantee, and the facts to be proved are lacking other evidence, the facts claimed by the party shall not be recognized. If a witness refuses to sign a guarantee, he/she shall not testify and shall bear the relevant expenses himself/herself. In cases involving suspected false litigation that harms national interests, public interests, or the legitimate rights and interests of others, the people's court shall investigate and collect relevant evidence to ascertain the basic facts of the case.
VIII. Carefully examine mediation agreements to ensure they are authentic and lawful. Where the parties have no substantial dispute over the subject matter of the litigation, voluntarily reach a mediation agreement and apply to the people's court for a mediation statement, it shall be examined whether the content of the agreement conforms to the basic facts of the case, whether it violates the provisions of the law, whether it involves the interests of persons outside the case, and whether it circumvents national policies. If the mediation agreement involves the content of determining rights, it shall be decided whether to issue a mediation statement on the basis of ascertaining the ownership of the rights. The standard of review of the authenticity and legality of the legal relationship involved in the mediation agreement shall not be lowered only on the grounds that the parties may voluntarily dispose of civil rights and interests, and special attention shall be paid to examining whether the mediation agreement harms national interests, public interests, or the legitimate rights and interests of others. If the parties reach a mediation agreement before the lawsuit and apply for judicial confirmation, it shall be emphasized to examine whether the mediation agreement violates mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, violates public order and good customs, or infringes upon national interests, public interests, or the legitimate rights and interests of others; if the content of the pre-litigation mediation agreement involves the determination of property rights or intellectual property rights, it shall be ruled inadmissible, and if it has been accepted, it shall be ruled to reject the application.
IX. Strictly enforce the law and strictly prevent false litigation. The investigation and punishment of false litigation shall be intensified in the procedures of enforcement objection, reconsideration, and participation in distribution. Circumstances in which false litigation may occur shall be examined with emphasis. The authenticity of the facts of the case and the legal relationship shall be comprehensively examined from the aspects of the subject of the litigation, the degree of correlation between the evidence and the facts of the case, and the connection between the evidence, and a comprehensive judgment shall be made as to whether there is any act of raising an objection to the object of enforcement by fabricating facts, applying for participation in distribution, or other acts that lead to erroneous enforcement by the people's court. In cases involving suspected false litigation, the parties and witnesses shall be summoned to court to be questioned in court on the relevant facts of the case. The legal consequences of participating in false litigation shall be actively explained to the parties to guide the parties to litigate in good faith. In cases identified as false litigation, it shall be ruled inadmissible or the application shall be rejected; if it has been accepted, it shall be ruled to reject its request.
X. Strengthen enforcement review and strictly investigate false non-litigation legal documents. Focus on preventing the application for enforcement based on false arbitration awards, arbitration mediation statements, notarized creditor's rights documents and other non-litigation legal documents. In the enforcement of non-litigation legal documents, if the parties are suspected of applying for enforcement of effective legal documents by means of malicious collusion, fabrication of facts, etc., a strict substantive review shall be conducted in accordance with the law. Efforts shall be made to collect evidence ex officio, and the relevant legal documents shall be examined and judged in light of the relationship between the parties, the facts of the case, the arbitration and notarization process, and other aspects to determine whether there are false circumstances and whether they harm national interests, public interests, or the legitimate rights and interests of others. If the above circumstances exist, it shall be ruled not to be enforced in accordance with the law, and judicial recommendations may be issued to the arbitration institution or the notary office when necessary.
XI. Strengthen evidence review and investigate and deal with false enforcement objection lawsuits. Enforcement objection lawsuits are an area where false litigation is growing rapidly at present, and great importance should be attached to the importance and urgency of preventing and punishing false litigation in enforcement objection lawsuits. The burden of proof shall be correctly allocated, and whether it is an enforcement objection lawsuit by an outsider or an enforcement objection lawsuit by an applicant for enforcement, the outsider shall bear the burden of proof that he/she enjoys civil rights and interests in the object of enforcement sufficient to exclude compulsory enforcement. The authenticity, legality and relevance of the evidence in the whole case shall be strictly examined, and for cases involving suspected false litigation, the authenticity and legality of the rights and interests of the outsider shall be strictly examined by means of summoning the outsider to court to make a statement, notifying the parties to submit original evidence, and investigating and verifying ex officio.
XII. Clarify legal relationships and prevent malicious collusion to evade enforcement. Enforcement objection lawsuits involve multiple legal relationships between three parties, and conflicts of interest mainly occur between outsiders and applicants for enforcement. The admission of the facts related to the rights and interests of outsiders by the person subject to enforcement shall be carefully determined. If the person subject to enforcement and the outsider have an interested relationship such as a kinship or affiliation, and support each other in the litigation, and there is a lack of sufficient evidence to prove that the outsider enjoys civil rights and interests sufficient to exclude compulsory enforcement, the outsider's claim should not be supported. If an outsider files an enforcement objection lawsuit claiming to exclude compulsory enforcement based on another effective legal document confirming rights made after the object of enforcement is sealed up, seized, or frozen, attention shall be paid to examining whether there are facts such as malicious collusion between the parties.
XIII. Strengthen identification and investigation and punishment, and prevent false private lending lawsuits. Private lending is a relatively active area of false litigation, and private lending cases shall be carefully examined, and false private lending lawsuits shall be accurately identified, strictly prevented, and severely punished in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Private Lending Cases. In private lending cases involving suspected false litigation, if the parties claim to pay large amounts of loans in cash, the details of the lender's cash source, withdrawal vouchers, delivery and other details shall be examined, and the lending relationship shall be determined in light of the lender's economic capacity, local transaction habits, and whether the transaction process is in line with common sense. If the parties claim to pay large amounts of loans by means of transfer, it shall be examined whether there are facts such as "closed-loop" transfer, circular transfer, and cash repayment of loans with clear accounts. If the plaintiff bearing the burden of proof refuses to appear in court without justified reasons, and the existing evidence cannot confirm the basic facts of the case such as the lending act, the amount of the loan, and the method of payment, the facts claimed by the plaintiff shall not be recognized.
XIV. Strictly investigate the principal and interest of loans and rectify illegal private lending in accordance with the law. For private lending cases suspected of involving false litigation, key issues such as the authenticity of the lending relationship, the amount of principal borrowed, and the scope of interest protection should be reviewed. Fictitious private lending relationships to evade enforcement or debts should not be supported for the plaintiff's claims. For those who falsely increase the principal of the loan through means such as 'upfront interest' or forged evidence, the amount of the loan principal shall be determined based on the actual amount lent by the lender. Those who engage in usury in the name of 'penalty interest,' 'default fine,' 'service fee,' 'intermediary fee,' 'security deposit,' 'extension fee,' etc., interest exceeding the upper limit of statutory interest rate protection shall not be protected.
Fifteen, Strictly review the validity of contracts and rectify false housing sales lawsuits. Lawsuits filed with fictitious housing sales contract relationships for illegal purposes such as evading debts, evading enforcement, obtaining illegal demolition benefits, or circumventing macro-control policies shall be deemed invalid. If the buyer fabricates housing purchase qualifications to participate in judicial auction of real estate and the auction is successful, the parties and interested parties claim that the auction is invalid on the grounds of violating public order and good customs, it should be supported. If the buyer fabricates housing purchase qualifications that lead to the auction being invalid, they shall bear the liability for compensation in accordance with the law.
Sixteen, Adhere to investigating falsehoods and correcting errors, and protect the rights of victims in accordance with the law. For cases suspected of false litigation, persons who may have an interest in the outcome of the case may be notified to participate in the litigation as third parties. For false litigation cases that have been investigated and dealt with, the effective judgments of false litigation cases shall be corrected in accordance with the law. For false litigation cases that cause losses to others, the victim's request for the perpetrator of the false litigation to bear the liability for compensation shall be supported. The amount of compensation liability of the perpetrator of false litigation can be determined based on factors such as the size of their fault, the severity of the circumstances, and the size of the victim's losses.
Seventeen, Identify crimes in accordance with the law and strictly pursue criminal responsibility for false litigation. If the act of false litigation meets the criteria for conviction as stipulated in the Criminal Law and judicial interpretations, it shall be identified as the crime of false litigation and other crimes in accordance with the law, and the criminal responsibility of the perpetrator shall be strictly pursued. If the crime of false litigation is committed, illegally occupying other people's property or evading legal debts, and also constitutes crimes such as fraud, embezzlement, refusal to execute judgments or rulings, or corruption, the crime with the heavier punishment shall be used for conviction and shall be severely punished. For the principal offenders who are most prominent in joint crimes of false litigation committed by multiple people, and defendants who have a criminal record of false litigation and commit the crime of false litigation again, the principle of strictness should be fully reflected, and the scope of application of probation and exemption from criminal punishment should be controlled.
Eighteen, Maintain a high-pressure stance and severely punish false litigation crimes of 'loan sharking'. Identify and severely crack down on false litigation violations and crimes in 'loan sharking' in a timely manner and in accordance with the law. If it meets the criteria for identifying organized crime, it shall be identified in accordance with the law. All property illegally obtained by the defendant through 'loan sharking' shall be recovered or ordered to be returned, and the property rights of the victims shall be protected in accordance with the law. Maintain a high-pressure and severe crackdown on illegal and criminal activities of false litigation of 'loan sharking', and take severely cracking down on illegal and criminal activities of false litigation of 'loan sharking' as an important part of the normalized fight against organized crime, so as to effectively maintain judicial order and the legitimate rights and interests of the people, and meet the people's psychological expectations for fairness and justice.
Nineteen, Do a good job in procedural connection and maintain criminal-civil coordination. If, after trial, the people's court believes that the act of a civil litigation party constitutes the crime of false litigation, the people's court that made the effective criminal judgment shall promptly inform the people's court that tried or executed the civil case. If an effective criminal judgment finds that the crime of false litigation has been committed, the relevant people's court shall promptly initiate trial supervision procedures in accordance with the law to correct the relevant civil judgments, rulings, and mediation documents. If a party or an outsider applies for retrial of an effective civil judgment, ruling, or mediation document on the grounds that an effective criminal judgment finds that the crime of false litigation has been committed, it shall be reviewed in a timely manner in accordance with the law.
Twenty, Strengthen team building and enhance rectification capabilities. People's courts at all levels should promptly organize court officers and police to study and master the central and local economic and social policies; incorporate the identification and investigation of false litigation into the scope of judge training; improve the judicial capacity of judges to identify and investigate false litigation through various forms such as typical case analysis, trial business exchanges, and court trial observations; strictly implement the judicial responsibility system, and deal with court staff who participate in false litigation seriously in accordance with regulations and disciplines, and build a people's court team that is loyal, clean, and responsible. If court staff members use their powers to jointly commit false litigation with others, and constitute the crime of false litigation, they shall be severely punished in accordance with the law, and if they also constitute other crimes, they shall be convicted and severely punished in accordance with the provisions of the heavier punishment. Court staff who fail to perform their duties correctly, neglect their duties, and cause false litigation cases to enter litigation procedures, resulting in significant losses to public property, national and people's interests, and meet the constituent elements of crimes stipulated in the Criminal Law, shall be convicted and punished in accordance with crimes such as dereliction of duty and malfeasance in the execution of judgments and rulings.
Twenty-one, Strengthen cooperation and coordination to form a joint force for rectification. People's courts at all levels should actively explore and establish and improve working mechanisms such as information sharing mechanisms for false litigation cases, mechanisms for transferring clues of illegal and criminal activities of false litigation, mechanisms for coordinating and punishing criminal-civil cross-cases of false litigation, and joint meeting mechanisms for rectifying false litigation with functional departments such as the People's Procuratorate, public security organs, and judicial administrative organs; work with various political and legal units to divide responsibilities and communicate and cooperate to promote the establishment of an information interconnection and sharing, orderly procedural connection, rectification coordination and cooperation, and a joint construction of a system for the rectification of false litigation.
Twenty-two, Explore credit punishment to help build integrity. People's courts at all levels should actively explore the establishment of a 'blacklist' system for false litigation. Establish a database of information on untrustworthy persons in false litigation, automatically identify information on false litigation personnel in the 'filing, trial, and execution' stages, automatically prompt and warn case handlers, and remind case handlers to conduct key reviews of relevant cases. Actively explore the public disclosure of the list of false litigation personnel and the credit punishment mechanism, and strive to connect with the information database of credit reporting agencies to promote the construction of a social credit system. Increase the cost of illegal activities for false litigation personnel through credit punishment, actively create a legal environment in the whole society where people dare not, cannot, and are unwilling to engage in false litigation, help build a society of integrity, and ensure the stable, orderly, and efficient development of the market economy.
Twenty-three, Carry out legal publicity and promote litigation integrity. People's courts at all levels should implement the publicity responsibility system of "whoever enforces the law publicizes the law", give full play to the advantages of the people's courts being at the forefront of handling cases, deeply analyze typical cases of false litigation, promptly announce them to the whole society, increase publicity, promote the principle of good faith civil litigation, demonstrate the determination of the people's courts to severely crack down on false litigation, enhance the whole society's awareness of preventing illegal acts of false litigation, and form a strong deterrent to false litigation acts. Through platforms such as litigation service halls, litigation service networks, 12368 hotlines, mobile micro-courts, and the "People's Court Civil Litigation Risk Reminder", inform the obligations of honest litigation, explain the legal responsibilities of false litigation, and guide the parties to litigate honestly and in accordance with the law, so that the concepts of judicial justice, universal law-abiding, and honesty and trustworthiness are deeply rooted in the hearts of the people.
Twenty-four, This opinion shall be implemented from November 10, 2021.
Supreme People's Court
November 4, 2021
Relevant Head of the Supreme People's Court
Answering reporters' questions on the "Opinions"
1. Question: False litigation has a strong concealment, especially when parties collude with each other, fabricate facts, and forge evidence. In response to the above problems, what methods does the "Opinions" provide for identification?
Answer: Thank you for your question. Indeed, these situations make the case superficially meet the proof standard of clear facts and sufficient evidence, and it is difficult for the people's court to examine the untruthfulness of the civil legal relationship. Based on a wide range of summaries of judicial practice experience, the "Opinions" stipulates how to identify false litigation from four aspects: First, it clearly stipulates what is false litigation, what situations belong to false litigation, and who are the actors of false litigation, providing a guideline for the people's court to identify false litigation; Second, it summarizes eight types of characteristic manifestations, such as the fact and reasons on which the plaintiff's lawsuit is based are not in line with common sense, the amount of the subject matter of the lawsuit is seriously inconsistent with the plaintiff's economic situation, the parties lack substantial adversarial debate, and self-confession is not in line with common sense, guiding judges to carry out targeted rectification; Third, it summarizes ten types of cases that are prone to false litigation, such as private lending disputes, lawsuits against execution objections, labor disputes, and divorce property division disputes, which helps to focus on key areas and improve the quality and efficiency of rectification; Fourth, it constructs a seamless identification and reminder mechanism for establishment, trial, and execution, makes full use of information systems such as the case filing assistance system to carry out identification and early warning, and if suspected false litigation is found, it is necessary to mark and remind the trial and execution departments. For marked cases, the trial and execution departments should focus on review and strictly prevent them, so as to realize the division of labor, cooperation, and effective cooperation in all links.
2. Question: False litigation has a very bad social impact. How does the "Opinions" increase the punishment for false litigation?
Answer: The "Opinions" adheres to the basic principle of severely punishing false litigation and mainly stipulates six measures: First, restrict the right to withdraw lawsuits in accordance with the law. Cases identified by the people's court as false litigation should not be allowed to be withdrawn by the plaintiff, and their claims should be rejected in accordance with the law. Second, clarify the circumstances of severe punishment. Those who commit false litigation with bad circumstances, serious consequences, or participate in false litigation multiple times and create a series of false litigation cases should be given heavier punishment. Third, stipulate liability for damages. Those who infringe upon the civil rights and interests of others through false litigation shall bear liability for compensation. The recently released case involves this issue. Fourth, establish the principle of overall strict criminal responsibility. Criminal responsibility should be strictly investigated for criminals of false litigation. For the principal offenders who are most responsible for the crime in joint crimes of false litigation and defendants who have a previous conviction for illegal and criminal false litigation and commit false litigation crimes again, strictness should be fully reflected. Fifth, strengthen the punishment of public officials and professionals. Public officials who create or participate in false litigation shall be notified to their units or supervisory authorities; professionals such as lawyers who create or participate in false litigation may be urged to impose administrative penalties or industry sanctions through judicial recommendations; judicial staff who use their powers to participate in false litigation and constitute a crime shall be held criminally responsible in accordance with the law. Sixth, strengthen credit punishment. Since 2019, the Ningbo Court in Zhejiang has released a "blacklist" of false litigation involving 252 people and 13 enterprises, and a "yellow list" involving 410 people and 11 enterprises, giving 3 to 5 years of credit punishment, with good results. The "Opinions" absorbs this experience and requires actively exploring the establishment of a "blacklist" system for false litigation to create a legal environment in the whole society where people dare not, cannot, and do not want to engage in false litigation.
3. Question: How can we give play to the functional role of criminal trials and increase the punishment for false litigation?
Answer: False litigation disrupts judicial order, infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of others, and has very serious social harm. It is necessary to give full play to the punishment and crime prevention functions of criminal law and pursue the criminal responsibility of relevant personnel in accordance with the law. The "Opinions" sets up a number of special provisions in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Law and relevant judicial interpretations and normative documents, and makes specific provisions on the overall principles and key points of attack on criminal responsibility for false litigation. The "Opinions" clarifies that if the act of false litigation meets the criteria for conviction of crimes such as the crime of false litigation, the criminal responsibility of the actor shall be strictly investigated; if court staff members use their powers to commit false litigation jointly with others and constitute the crime of false litigation, they shall be punished severely in accordance with the law, and if they also constitute other crimes, they shall be convicted and punished severely in accordance with the provisions of the heavier punishment. In response to the problem that the application of suspended sentences and exemptions from criminal punishment is too common in criminal cases of false litigation in practice, the "Opinions" emphasizes that the scope of application of suspended sentences and exemptions from criminal punishment should be controlled for the principal offenders who are most responsible for the crime in joint crimes of false litigation committed by multiple people, and for the defendants who have a previous conviction for illegal and criminal false litigation and commit false litigation crimes again. In response to the problem of "routine loan" false litigation that the people strongly reflect, the "Opinions" proposes that it is necessary to promptly identify and severely crack down on illegal and criminal acts of false litigation in "routine loans" in accordance with the law, and if they meet the criteria for the identification of criminal gangs, they should be identified in accordance with the law, maintain a high-pressure strict crackdown on illegal and criminal acts of false litigation in "routine loans", and effectively safeguard judicial order and the legitimate rights and interests of the people, so as to meet the people's psychological expectations for fairness and justice.
To ensure the legal consequences of false litigation are effectively implemented, the "Opinions" also provide specific regulations on how to coordinate criminal and civil litigation procedures. False litigation crimes occur during civil litigation, and there are disputes in practice regarding the coordination of criminal and civil litigation procedures in the handling of false litigation crime cases. The "Opinions on Further Strengthening the Punishment of False Litigation Crimes," jointly promulgated by the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, and the Ministry of Justice in March 2021, dedicates a special chapter to detailed regulations on this issue. The "Opinions" further clarify the information communication mechanism between the trial court for false litigation criminal cases and the trial court for related civil cases, as well as the work requirements for relevant People's Courts to promptly initiate trial supervision procedures to correct errors in accordance with the law. It requires that the People's Court that made the effective criminal judgment for false litigation crimes should promptly inform the People's Court that tried or executed the related civil case; the relevant People's Court should promptly initiate trial supervision procedures in accordance with the law to correct the relevant civil judgments, rulings, and mediation documents that have been determined by the effective criminal judgment to constitute false litigation crimes. For the retrial applications of parties and outsiders, they should be reviewed promptly in accordance with the law, and procedural coordination should be done well to maintain criminal-civil collaboration. The "Opinions" also stipulate that if the People's Court discovers suspected crimes of false litigation during the handling of cases, it should promptly transfer the relevant materials to the criminal investigation authority in accordance with the law to ensure that false litigation crimes are punished in a timely manner.
More News