China Justice Observer

中司观察

EnglishArabicChinese (Simplified)DutchFrenchGermanHindiItalianJapaneseKoreanPortugueseRussianSpanishSwedishHebrewIndonesianVietnameseThaiTurkishMalay

SPP Promotes Corporate Compliance Non-Prosecution Work

Sat, 17 Jul 2021
Categories: China Legal Trends

On 3 June 2021, China’s Supreme People's Procuratorate (SPP) released the “Guiding Opinions on Establishing a Third-Party Supervision and Evaluation Mechanism for the Compliance of Enterprises Involved in Cases (for Trial Implementation)” (关于建立涉案企业合规第三方监督评估机制的指导意见(试行)) and Typical Cases concerning the pilot reform of corporate compliance, thus providing pilot procuratorates with guidance on the corporate compliance non-prosecution work.

"Corporate compliance non-prosecution system" refers to a system under which prosecutors can order enterprises suspected of crimes to propose a special compliance plan according to the facts of crimes, urge them to establish the corporate compliance management system, and then make a non-prosecution decision as appropriate, where they find that such enterprises are willing to establish a compliance system. This system aims to urge the enterprises involved in cases to make compliance commitments and actively implement such commitments, promote enterprises to operate in compliance with the laws and regulations, and reduce and prevent crimes committed by enterprises. Driven by the SPP, China has been exploring and implementing this system.

Since March 2020, the SPP has launched the first phase of the pilot program in six primary-level procuratorates of Shanghai, Jiangsu, Shandong, and Guangdong.

In April 2021, the SPP issued the “Program for Carrying out Pilot Reform of Corporate Compliance” (关于开展企业合规改革试点工作的方案) (hereinafter referred to as the “Program”), which officially launched the second phase of the pilot reform of corporate compliance. The scope of the pilot program was expanded to ten provinces (municipalities), namely, Beijing, Liaoning, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Fujian, Shandong, Hubei, Hunan, and Guangdong. According to the Program, the specific pilot units would be determined by the aforesaid provincial-level procuratorates at their discretion, and each province (municipality) would designate one or two primary-level procuratorates as the pilot units.

 

Cover Photo by Ethan Wong (https://unsplash.com/@ethanwong) on Unsplash

 

Contributors: CJO Staff Contributors Team

Save as PDF

You might also like

PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal, Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments

Recent Australian case law clarifies that the “double interest” mechanism in the People’s Republic of China (hereafter ‘PRC’) monetary judgments functions as a compensatory post-judgment interest framework rather than an unenforceable penalty. This consolidates Australia’s position as a highly attractive and creditor-friendly forum for enforcing Chinese judgments. See Zhengzhou Lvdu Real Estate Group Co v Shu [2024] NSWSC 58 (6 February 2024), Fu v Pang [2025] VSC 597 (16 September 2025)

IOMed Settles First Case, Resolving China-Singapore Maritime Dispute

The newly established International Organization for Mediation (IOMed) has successfully resolved its inaugural case—a maritime charter dispute between Chinese and Singaporean parties—marking a major milestone for the world’s first government-backed global mediation body.

China Overhauls Arbitration Law for Global Alignment

Having entered into force on March 1, 2026, China’s first comprehensive revision of its 1995 Arbitration Law has introduced ad hoc arbitration, strengthened interim relief, and aligned the legal framework more closely with international standards.