Practicing Criminal Defense in China: Procedural Mechanics and Strategic Advocacy

China’s criminal process unfolds through three codified stages under the Criminal Procedure Law (CPL), each presenting distinct challenges and opportunities for defense counsel.

I. Investigation Phase (侦查阶段)

Key Characteristics:

Duration: 2 months (standard) to 8+ months (complex cases with extensions).

Investigative Authority: Public Security Bureau (PSB) for most crimes; State Security Agencies for political/security offenses; Anti-corruption Bureau for crimes committed by public officers.

Defense Access:

First lawyer-client meeting permitted within 48 hours after detention (Art. 39 CPL).

Limited access to case files (charge summaries only until prosecution phase).

Restrictions on communication in cases involving state secrets or terrorism.

Critical Defense Actions:

Bail Applications (取保候审):

Submit medical records, employment contracts, community references or any documents from which the suspect benefits to negate “social dangerousness” (Art. 67 CPL).

Utilize family guarantor systems prevalent in rural jurisdictions.

Evidence Preservation:

Request PSB to document exculpatory evidence (Art. 42).

Petition for exclusion of torture-obtained confessions (Art. 56).

Case Example: In a 2021 Beijing embezzlement case, defense counsel secured bail by presenting GPS data disproving the defendant’s presence at the alleged crime scene.

II. Prosecutorial Review & Pre-Trial Strategy

During the 1-1.5 month review period (Art. 172 CPL), procuratorates determine whether to indict. With a 93% indictment rate (SPC 2023), defense strategies focus on:

1. Evidentiary Challenges:

File exclusion motions for illegally obtained evidence (e.g., confessions without simultaneous video recording).

Submit expert reports countering forensic conclusions (common in financial/digital evidence cases).

2. Negotiated Resolutions:

Leverage the Plea Leniency System (认罪认罚从宽):

Negotiate sentence reductions (typically 10–30%) in exchange for guilty pleas.

Secure written leniency agreements signed by prosecutors (Art. 173 CPL).

Advocate for conditional non-prosecution in juvenile or minor offense cases (Art. 282).

3. Strategic Disclosure:

Prosecutors must disclose evidence 30 days pre-trial (Art. 40), but defense teams often receive incomplete files. Countermeasures include:

Filing immediate objections to incomplete disclosure.

Motioning for adjournments if critical evidence surfaces mid-trial.

III. Trial Dynamics & Defense Tactics

1. Pre-Trial Preparation

Case Theory Development:

Prioritize procedural violations (e.g., illegal searches, denial of meeting rights) as appeal-safe arguments.

In politically sensitive cases, frame defenses around technical legal errors rather than factual disputes.

Witness Management:

Despite 92% of trials relying on affidavit evidence (SPC 2023), subpoena key witnesses where possible.

Prepare written questions for judges to pose to absent witnesses (Art. 195 CPL).

2. In-Court Advocacy

Opening Statements:

Emphasize procedural defects to establish reasonable doubt.

Cite Supreme People’s Court Guiding Cases to anchor arguments.

Cross-Examination:

Challenge forensic reports by highlighting chain-of-custody gaps.

Contrast witness affidavits with prior inconsistent statements.

Sentencing Submissions:

Present mitigation portfolios including:

Compensation agreements with victims.

Psychological evaluations for mental health defenses.

Community rehabilitation plans.

Case Example: A 2023 Shenzhen cybercrime trial saw charges downgraded after the defense demonstrated flawed IP address tracing methodology.

IV. Systemic Constraints & Risk Mitigation

1. Institutional Challenges

Evidence Asymmetry:

Defense lawyers lack subpoena power; private investigators operate in legal grey zones.

Counterstrategy: File investigation petitions (Art. 41) demanding PSB collect exculpatory evidence.

Political-Legal Coordination:

Courts consult political-legal committees in high-stakes cases.

Mitigation: Avoid politically charged language; frame arguments strictly within statutory law.

2. Professional Risks

Ethical Boundaries:

342 lawyers investigated for “obstruction of testimony” (2018–2022).

Best Practice: Record all client meetings; avoid witness contact without court approval.

Contempt of Court Risks:

Refrain from public comments on ongoing cases; utilize closed-door judicial suggestion procedures.

V. Post-Trial Remedies & Long-Term Advocacy

1. Appeals (二审程序):

Grounds for reversal:

Procedural violations (e.g., denied access to counsel).

New evidence proving innocence (rarely accepted post-2020 CPL amendments).

Submit appeals within 10 days of verdict (Art. 230).

2. Retrial Petitions (审判监督程序):

File with provincial High Courts or the SPC, attaching:

Exonerating forensic re-examinations.

Evidence of judicial misconduct (e.g., undisclosed conflicts of interest).

Note: Retrials average 3–5 years for review (SPC 2022 data).

 If you have any question or legal service need, please don't hesitate to contact us at Whatsapp:0086-13416498997