Recently, the National Institute of Legal Aid at China University of Political Science and Law, in collaboration with the Honggutan District Procuratorate of Nanchang City, Jiangxi Province, convened an "Academic Symposium on Prosecutorial Agencies Supporting and Protecting the Development of Private Enterprises" in Nanchang. Experts, scholars, and representatives from legal practice fields and academic research institutions engaged in in-depth discussions around two key themes: prosecutorial agencies' role in supporting and safeguarding the private economy, and the deepening and advancement of corporate criminal compliance.

Prudent Law Enforcement Safeguards the Private Economy

In recent years, there have been frequent instances of unequal treatment and inadequate protection of state-owned enterprises versus private businesses in criminal proceedings. Addressing how to ensure equal protection for the non-public sector, Fan Chongyi, Honorary Dean and Professor at the National Legal Aid Research Institute of China University of Political Science and Law, emphasized in his keynote speech that, in addition to prioritizing substantive legal measures to safeguard non-public entities equally, procedural safeguards must also be strengthened. First, it is crucial to uphold the right litigation principles—guiding decisions with humility, prudence, and goodwill—to achieve comprehensive, fair, and lawful protection of the non-public economy. In particular, adopting a humanistic approach to the rule of law, decision-makers should carefully weigh the potential benefits and risks before resorting to any criminal measures. Second, it’s essential to accurately distinguish between economic misconduct and economic crime. We must adopt a balanced perspective toward irregular business practices within market economies, meticulously analyzing each case individually. This includes clearly delineating the boundaries between economic disputes and criminal offenses, differentiating between unintended deviations during reform exploration and deliberate exploitation of policy loopholes for illicit purposes, as well as distinguishing between legitimate business income and illegal activities. Furthermore, the criteria for determining and handling assets involved in criminal cases must be strictly regulated to ensure precision, avoiding confusion between illegally obtained gains and lawful property, or between personal assets and those belonging to family members. Finally, robust procedural safeguards should be put in place to strengthen the identification and management of assets tied to criminal cases. This includes refining the legal framework for asset disposal, enhancing due-process protections, and establishing mechanisms for redress when necessary. Additionally, in line with the Criminal Procedure Law’s mandate to educate citizens about crime prevention, a comprehensive system of legal tools and policies should be developed to actively guide, assist, and support the sustainable growth of the non-public sector. 　　

Gu Yongzhong, Chief Expert and Professor at the National Institute of Legal Aid under China University of Political Science and Law, believes that private enterprises should not only receive equal protection under the law but also be afforded special protections—within the bounds of what’s legally permissible. Equal protection under the law primarily applies to substantive legal principles: whether state-owned enterprises, state entrepreneurs, private enterprises, or private entrepreneurs, they should all be treated equally when it comes to criminal law enforcement. Moreover, given the unique characteristics of private enterprises, special protections—particularly regarding personal and property-related coercive measures during criminal proceedings—should be extended to the greatest extent possible, as long as they remain within the framework of the law. Gu Yongzhong suggests that procuratorial organs should not only provide lawful protection once private enterprises become involved in legal cases but also leverage their distinct position and responsibilities to proactively support these businesses before any legal issues arise. By doing so, they can help private enterprises operate legally, foster healthy growth, and ensure sustainable development. 　　

Wu Hongyao, Dean and Professor at the National Institute of Legal Aid under China University of Political Science and Law, believes that when it comes to serving and safeguarding private enterprises, the first priority is adopting a holistic perspective and maintaining a broad strategic mindset. Although prosecutorial work is just one component within the larger framework of the nation's overall socio-economic development, prosecutors must embrace the principle of "focusing on the bigger picture while operating in a specific area." This means carefully considering what role the procuratorate should play in driving social and economic progress, as well as assessing how criminal justice decisions impact the vitality of the market economy. Second, there’s a need to shift mindsets entirely. Prosecutors must cultivate an equal-protective approach—and ensure this principle is implemented meticulously. In the era of the Civil Code, protecting private enterprises requires firmly establishing the concept of property rights. At the same time, we must move away from a punitive mindset toward a more governance-oriented approach, using criminal prosecution as a tool to actively engage in societal governance. When engaging in societal governance, prosecutors should adhere to two key principles: 1. **Market Principles**: Any measures designed to support and protect private enterprises must align with market dynamics. It’s crucial to clearly define the scope of private enterprises and determine precisely which types of crimes—when committed by such entities—warrant special protective measures. Such distinctions need to be refined and clearly articulated. 2. **Rule of Law and Judicial Principles**: Within the framework of equal protection under the rule of law, prosecutors must strike a balanced approach between providing tailored treatment and ensuring fairness for all parties involved. Additionally, a "bottom-line" mindset is essential: if the boundaries of the rule of law are crossed, even well-intentioned efforts to offer special protection could inadvertently lead to systemic inequities. 　　

How can we optimize the criminal justice environment for safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of private enterprises? Xie Xiaojian, Vice Dean and Professor at the School of Law of Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, argues that it is essential to uphold modern criminal justice principles: First, deeply implement the judicial philosophy of equal protection—treating state-owned enterprises, collectively owned enterprises, as well as individual and private businesses equally. This ensures that all types of market entities enjoy equal standing in litigation, equal procedural rights, and equal legal protections. Second, firmly put into practice the judicial approach of serving economic and social development. Third, rigorously enforce the criminal justice policy of "fewer arrests, cautious prosecution, and prudent detention," aiming to minimize the impact of criminal justice measures on the normal operations and production of enterprises, thereby helping businesses survive, thrive, and sustain long-term success. Finally, thoroughly embrace the judicial principle of protecting property rights. During legal proceedings, special attention should be paid to safeguarding the lawful assets of private enterprises, moving away from the traditional mindset that prioritizes individuals over property. It’s crucial to avoid unnecessarily expanding the scope of asset seizures, detentions, or freezes related to criminal cases. At the same time, we must strictly punish, in accordance with the law, any criminal activities involving organized crime groups that threaten or squeeze out private enterprises—and ensure that crimes targeting the property rights and interests of private entrepreneurs are also dealt with decisively under the law. 　　

Serving and safeguarding the development of the private economy has become a new mission and responsibility for procuratorial organs. Sun Daocui, associate professor and director of the Academic Department at the National Institute of Legal Aid under China University of Political Science and Law, emphasizes that, on one hand, procuratorial bodies should fully consider the unique characteristics and diverse management models of the private sector when handling judicial cases. They must adhere to a rule-of-law mindset and adopt a historical perspective, ensuring the comprehensive implementation of the criminal policy that balances strictness with flexibility. In particular, it is crucial to clearly distinguish between legitimate financing and illegal fundraising, property disputes and malicious appropriation, as well as personal assets versus corporate legal person property. On the other hand, procuratorial agencies should collaborate closely with federations of industry and commerce at all levels to effectively maintain regular communication channels, actively listen to the judicial needs of private enterprises during their growth, and strengthen cooperation with relevant law enforcement and judicial authorities. This will help ensure that efforts to support private-sector development are carried out more practically and meticulously. Submarine, a full-time member of the Procuratorial Committee of Jiangxi Provincial People’s Procuratorate, highlights two key priorities in serving and protecting private enterprises: First, ensure that cases involving private businesses are handled accurately and efficiently. For crimes that harm the legitimate rights and interests of private companies, while maintaining strict punishment, procuratorial bodies should also thoroughly consult with affected enterprises, intensify efforts to recover stolen assets and minimize losses, and proactively assist businesses in mitigating damages caused by criminal activities. Meanwhile, for cases where private enterprises themselves are suspected of wrongdoing, proactive exploration of criminal compliance management is essential, along with the consistent application of the criminal justice policy of "fewer arrests, cautious prosecution, and cautious detention." Timely reviews of the necessity of detention should be conducted, and robust education on plea bargaining and guilty pleas should be provided, making full use of favorable legal policies to help enterprises correct mistakes and resume sustainable growth. Second, procuratorial organs must streamline communication mechanisms with private enterprises. Jiangxi Provincial Procuratorate has established a daily liaison system with the provincial Federation of Industry and Commerce. Through this mechanism, the federation vets and forwards specific case-related requests from private businesses directly to the provincial procuratorate, which then takes direct responsibility for monitoring and overseeing these cases. Prosecutorial offices at the provincial, city, and county levels jointly ensure that each case meets rigorous legal standards, addressing them appropriately and in accordance with the law. Finally, Du Yingchun, Party Secretary of the Honggutan District Procuratorate in Nanchang City, Jiangxi Province, suggests that procuratorial agencies can further enhance their support for private enterprises in two key areas: First, strengthen dialogue and collaboration with internal audit, supervision, and legal departments within enterprises, helping companies refine their internal governance frameworks and bolster their capacity for effective self-regulation. Second, focus on enterprises involved in criminal cases, using these cases as opportunities for deeper analysis and broader outreach. By examining individual incidents, procuratorial bodies can guide entrepreneurs toward adopting more forward-thinking business strategies and cultivating a stronger awareness of criminal risk prevention.

Deepening the exploration of corporate criminal compliance is urgently needed.

Compliance management for private enterprises is a relatively new issue in China, currently at the pilot stage. Fan Chongyi argues that the significance of corporate compliance—and particularly criminal compliance—can be understood from several key perspectives: First, moving from corporate compliance to criminal compliance has become a global trend. Corporate compliance served as the foundation for criminal compliance, while criminal compliance, in turn, represents the inevitable next step for companies striving to align with evolving legal standards. Second, this shift is essential to advancing the overarching strategy of governing the country according to law, as well as enhancing the nation’s governance system and capacity-building efforts. Third, it addresses the critical need to prevent criminal offenses. At its core, corporate compliance management—whether in name or content—centers on addressing a company’s growth and operational challenges, including various business risks. The effectiveness of compliance practices directly influences the broader landscape of criminal risk, ultimately serving as a proactive tool to mitigate potential legal liabilities and, by extension, prevent criminal activities from occurring altogether. Meanwhile, Professor Hu Xiangfu from the School of Law at Nanchang University notes that there remains some debate regarding the value and practical role of criminal compliance. He emphasizes that criminal compliance is primarily seen as an element that may lead to lighter penalties, functioning mainly as a discretionary factor in sentencing decisions. Its primary purpose, however, lies in preventing recidivism and mitigating the emergence of criminal legal risks, thus fulfilling a general preventive function. As for the scope of criminal compliance applications: 1. **Case Coverage**: Currently, during the pilot phase, criminal compliance applies mainly to economic crimes and official misconduct cases involving companies and enterprises in their production and business operations—typically minor criminal offenses. However, once criminal compliance is fully implemented nationwide, it should logically extend to cover all types of corporate crimes stipulated under criminal law, ensuring fairness across the board. 2. **Applicability to Individuals**: Criminal compliance can apply not only to the companies involved but also to specific individuals directly responsible, such as senior executives and other personnel bearing direct accountability. It’s important to note, though, that when applying criminal compliance measures to natural persons, these measures must remain strictly limited to actions directly tied to the company’s business operations. 　　

Under the new-era mission of ensuring the healthy development of private enterprises, corporate compliance exploration and reform have emerged as a rapidly growing area of prosecutorial work. Regarding how procuratorial organs can engage in building corporate compliance systems, Fan Chongyi emphasizes three key points: First, it is essential to thoroughly study the concepts of both general corporate compliance and criminal compliance, while accurately understanding the interplay between the two. Second, prosecutors must carefully analyze the unique characteristics of criminal compliance and explore innovative ways for their offices to participate effectively in this process. Third, the design of criminal compliance programs should reflect mutual agreement, be tailored to specific needs, account for varying levels of risk (with distinct preventive measures addressing different types of criminal threats faced by individual companies), and remain fully implementable. Cao Yunge, Deputy Chief Prosecutor of the Nanchang City Procuratorate in Jiangxi Province, suggests that focusing on compliance reviews can enhance the proactive role of prosecutors in preventing corporate crime, thereby creating a new platform for procuratorial involvement in broader social governance efforts. The introduction of corporate compliance reviews will not only elevate the effectiveness of prosecutors' crime-prevention functions but also extend their reach beyond just those companies already involved in wrongdoing. More importantly, it will foster proactive general prevention among compliant businesses, driving transformative upgrades in corporate governance structures and organizational cultures—and ultimately contributing to an overall improvement in the business environment. Cao Hongjun, Associate Professor at the National Prosecutors College and Deputy Secretary-General of the Chinese Society of Criminology, argues that the first step should be to categorize and clearly define the scope of crimes committed by private enterprises and their leaders, thereby establishing clear boundaries for prosecutors when implementing criminal compliance measures within these cases. Additionally, after deciding not to prosecute a company involved in a crime, prosecutors should take follow-up actions—particularly by issuing "criminal-administrative coordination" recommendations urging relevant administrative authorities to impose appropriate administrative penalties. However, in practice, inconsistencies between criminal law and related administrative regulations often lead to disproportionately harsh penalties (such as excessively high fines that many companies cannot afford), undermining the original intent behind the prosecutor's decision not to pursue charges. Sun Dao Cui highlights that the emerging and evolving model of prosecution-led criminal compliance is inherently justified, rooted in the constitutional status, fundamental powers, and practical demands of procuratorial bodies. He stresses that prosecutors should actively embrace this approach while simultaneously addressing critical challenges: First, the issue of compliance effectiveness remains largely uncharted territory; thus, it is imperative to quickly gather practical experience, refine existing frameworks, and enhance their operational feasibility. Second, drawing from successful pilot programs like the summary procedure and the plea-bargaining system, prosecutors could develop structured pathways and models to guide the phased implementation of criminal compliance initiatives.

Source: Procuratorate Daily

Affiliation: People's Procuratorate Magazine