Punish accomplices in telecom and online fraud in accordance with the law! The Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security have further clarified the standards for handling cases involving the crime of assisting information network criminal activities.
Release Date:
2025-07-28
BEIJING, July 28 (Xinhua) — By reporters Liu Shuo and Qi Qi: On the 28th, the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security issued Opinions on Handling Criminal Cases Involving Assistance in Cybercrime Activities, setting forth clearer and more specific criteria for conviction and sentencing, as well as policy guidelines, for offenses such as aiding and abetting cybercrime.
The crime of assisting information network criminal activities was newly established by the Ninth Amendment to the Criminal Law, which came into effect in November 2015. Despite improvements in the situation thanks to stringent enforcement, the number of cases involving “two cards” (telephone cards and bank cards) remains high. Such crimes exhibit clear trends toward professionalization and transnationalization, and defendants are characterized by low age, low educational attainment, low income, and a high proportion of first-time offenders—hence the “three lows and one high” pattern. In judicial practice, inconsistencies persist in the application of the law and in the interpretation and implementation of relevant policies. Against this backdrop, the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security have jointly issued guidelines to crack down on these offenses in accordance with the law, thereby severing the upstream and downstream links in information‑network crimes such as telecom and online fraud.
According to the introduction, the Opinions comprise five sections and 16 provisions, providing comprehensive and systematic regulations on overarching requirements for case handling, the lawful determination of the crime of assisting information network criminal activities, the accurate application of criminal policies, and the adherence to a holistic approach to governance. In light of statutory provisions and the evolving needs of judicial practice, the Opinions have revised and consolidated relevant provisions from earlier normative documents, further clarifying the rules for determining subjective knowledge in cases of aiding and abetting cybercrime, the criteria for deeming such conduct “serious” when involving “two types of cards,” and the distinctions between accomplices in aiding and abetting crimes and those involved in related offenses such as concealment or fraud. These measures aim to address inconsistencies in the application of the law and in judicial determinations.
The Opinions stipulate that the criminal policy of combining leniency with strictness must be implemented comprehensively and accurately, and specify the concrete circumstances warranting either stricter or more lenient treatment. According to the Opinions, case-handling authorities shall, in accordance with the law, impose severe penalties on organized, professional, and cross-border coordinated acts of assisting information network-related crimes, as well as on organizers, planners, commanders, and key members who engage in such assistance. Crimes committed by exploiting artificial intelligence technologies, including “deep synthesis,” are also classified as grounds for stringent punishment. By contrast, minors, students, and individuals at the downstream end of the criminal chain whose offenses are relatively minor shall be treated leniently in accordance with the law.
In the area of comprehensive governance, the Opinions set forth requirements for ensuring proper coordination between administrative and criminal enforcement in accordance with the law, as well as for promoting the implementation of judicial recommendations and procuratorial recommendations. With regard to “insiders” who commit the crime of assisting information network criminal activities by taking advantage of their professional position or by breaching specific duties imposed by their profession, the Opinions stipulate that occupational bans and restraining orders shall be imposed in accordance with the law.
[Editor-in-charge: Jiao Peng]
Source: Xinhua Net
Tags:
More information
Contact Us
Address:
No. 1, No. 1, New District Road No. 1, Gaocheng District, Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province
WeChat/WhatsApp:
Phone:
Email: