Joint Interpretation Released by Two High Courts to Severely Crack Down on the Strongly Reflected Crime of Refusing to Execute

On November 18, the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate jointly issued the “Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Refusal to Execute Judgments and Rulings” (Fa Shi [2024] No. 13, hereinafter referred to as the “Interpretation”), which will come into force on December 1, 2024.
The “Interpretation” adheres to the principle of proportionality between offense, responsibility, and punishment, focuses on practical needs and problem-solving, severely cracks down on the criminal act of refusing to execute that has been strongly反映 by the people, effectively protects the legitimate rights and interests of winning parties, and maintains judicial authority and credibility. The “Interpretation” consists of 16 articles, mainly including the following contents:
Firstly, it clarifies the situation of “having the ability to execute but refusing to do so, with serious circumstances.” Based on the “Interpretation of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on Article 313 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China,” the “Interpretation” further enumerates ten situations of “having the ability to execute but refusing to do so, with serious circumstances,” mainly including maliciously disposing of property rights and interests without compensation by means such as abandoning creditor’s rights or guarantees for creditor’s rights, or maliciously extending the performance period of matured creditor’s rights, or disposing of property rights and interests through false settlements or transfers, resulting in the inability to execute judgments or rulings; implementing malicious actions such as acquiring others’ property at obviously unreasonable high prices or providing guarantees for others’ debts, which reduce the responsible property, resulting in the inability to execute judgments or rulings; after taking compulsory measures such as fines and detention, still refusing to fulfill the obligation to assist in exercising personal rights, resulting in the inability to execute judgments or rulings, with malicious circumstances; obstructing execution personnel from entering the execution site by means such as intimidation, insults, gathering crowds to make a disturbance, or threats, resulting in the inability to carry out execution work, with malicious circumstances; and so on.
Secondly, it clarifies the situation of “extremely serious circumstances.” The “Interpretation” stipulates five situations where persons with execution obligations have the ability to execute but refuse to do so, with “extremely serious circumstances,” mainly including obstructing execution through false litigation, false arbitration, false notarization, etc., resulting in the inability to execute judgments or rulings; gathering crowds to attack the execution site, resulting in the inability to carry out execution work; conducting physical attacks on execution personnel through violent methods such as besieging, detaining, or beating, resulting in the inability to carry out execution work; due to refusal to execute, causing the applicant to commit suicide, self-harm, or other serious consequences; and other extremely serious circumstances.
Thirdly, it clarifies that hiding or transferring property before the judgment or ruling takes effect can constitute the crime of refusing to execute judgments or rulings. The “Interpretation” stipulates that if, in order to evade execution obligations, the perpetrator hides or transfers property after the litigation begins but before the judgment takes effect, and after the judgment or ruling takes effect, it is verified as true and they refuse to execute when required, they can be deemed as having the ability to execute but refusing to do so, with serious circumstances, and shall be held criminally liable for the crime of refusing to execute judgments or rulings.
Fourthly, it clarifies that outsiders who help hide or transfer property can be held criminally liable as co-offenders. The “Interpretation” stipulates that if an outsider knowingly assists a person with execution obligations who has the ability to execute but refuses to execute the judgment or ruling of the people’s court, conspires with them, and assists in hiding, transferring property, or other acts of refusing to execute, resulting in the inability to execute the judgment or ruling, they shall be punished as an accomplice in the crime of refusing to execute judgments or rulings.
Fifthly, it clarifies the circumstances for severe and lenient punishment. Regarding severe punishment, the “Interpretation” stipulates that if the refusal to execute judgments or rulings related to the payment of alimony, support, nurturing fees, pensions, medical expenses, labor remuneration, etc., constitutes a crime, it shall be punished severely according to law. Regarding lenient punishment, the “Interpretation” stipulates that if, before the prosecution is initiated, the execution obligation is fulfilled in full or in part, and the offense is minor, prosecution may be waived according to law; if, before the judgment is宣布 at the first trial, the execution obligation is fulfilled in full or in part, and the offense is minor, a lesser punishment or exemption from punishment may be given according to law.
Sixthly, it clarifies the procedures for recovering losses and chasing after stolen property. The “Interpretation” stipulates that when prosecuting a defendant for the crime of refusing to execute judgments or rulings, property illegally disposed of through deliberate destruction, disposition without compensation, disposition at obviously unreasonable prices, false transfers, etc., shall be recovered or ordered to be returned and handed over to the executing court for disposal according to law. The people’s procuratorate shall review the property involved in the case based on the investigation and transfer situation, and propose clear opinions on the handling of the property involved when initiating the prosecution. The people’s court shall make a judgment according to law and handle the property involved in the case.
In the next step, the Supreme Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate will strengthen guidance at lower levels, strictly enforce relevant provisions of laws and judicial interpretations, accurately grasp the requirements for case handling, crack down on the crime of refusing to execute judgments or rulings according to law, and protect the vital interests of the people.