动态与观点
Abstract
China's civil enforcement system has long been a source of public dissatisfaction. Consequently, various reform proposals are frequently discussed across all sectors of society. While the reform to separate adjudication from enforcement has recently returned to the spotlight, no concrete plan has yet been issued.The general framework for this reform involves stripping the enforcement function away from the People's Courts—which currently handle both adjudication and enforcement—and either establishing an independent agency dedicated solely to civil enforcement or integrating the function into a more powerful body, such as a public security agency.Between 2004 and 2009, I worked in the enforcement bureau of a grassroots People's Court in China, giving me firsthand experience with the country's civil enforcement operations. Here, I offer a brief analysis of my personal understanding regarding the difficulty of enforcement (often referred to as zhixing nan) within the system.
Legal Awareness
Most Chinese citizens have limited understanding of civil litigation, leading to several misconceptions. For instance, there is a belief that the vulnerable party ought to win the case; if they lose, it is attributed to judicial corruption. Conversely, if they win, they expect the judgment to be fully satisfied, viewing any failure to do so as negligence on the part of the enforcement officers.As is well known, civil enforcement in China is primarily led by the People's Courts, with assistance from the parties involved. This institutional design has been detached from judicial reality from the outset. First, the People's Courts simply lack the capacity to handle the full scope of enforcement demands. Second, the system fosters a public misconception that the backing of state coercive power equates to a state guarantee of the debt, implying that enforcement failure is impossible. Consequently, people often imagine the People's Court as a money-printing machine—believing that once the machine starts running, every problem can be solved.
Risk Awareness
Many commercial transactions take place without the involvement of lawyers. When risks materialize, parties rush to litigation, mistakenly assuming the People's Court will invariably uphold their legitimate rights and interests. This leads to unrealistic lawsuits and eventual defeat. Even if a case fortunately reaches the enforcement stage, any failure to execute the judgment results in the People's Court being blamed. This explains why the courts receive low public approval ratings despite their diligent efforts.
Reasons for the Difficulty of Enforcement
Based on my professional experience, I summarize the reasons as follows:The judgment debtor loses the capacity to perform obligations. This situation is most frequently observed in enforcement cases arising from tort claims. Many judgment debtors, due to a lack of risk awareness, frequently encounter adverse events that result in massive liabilities—sums far exceeding their actual capacity to pay.Across all strata of society, there is a marked reluctance to cooperate with enforcement efforts. Driven by self-interest, various groups are unwilling to assist in the enforcement process. When such behavior becomes a widespread social phenomenon, it is difficult to reverse the trend relying solely on judicial sanctions imposed by the courts.Judgment debtors often evade enforcement and conceal assets. This behavior—which is often embedded in the very inception of commercial transactions—constitutes the primary cause of the current difficulty in enforcement and represents the most serious challenge to the enforcement process.
Conclusion
The analysis above suggests that the separation of adjudication and enforcement does not appear to address the core issue. Consequently, authorities have been slow to produce a mature reform plan for this separation. A solution is only possible if the difficulty of enforcement is elevated from a mere legal issue to a broader societal concern.
律师介绍
Zunyi WANG Beijing Hengdu (Shanghai) Law Firm
Zunyi WANG is an Attorney at Law at Beijing Hengdu (Shanghai) Law Firm and holds a Bachelor of Laws from Peking University. He holds the Legal Professional Qualification Certificate, Professional Qualifications for Banking Professionals (intermediate level), Qualifications for Securities Industry Practitioners, Qualifications for Futures Practitioners, and Qualification for Fund Practitioners. He has previously served at a primary people's court and as the head of legal and compliance affairs for a financial leasing company. He is a Committee Member of the Non-Bank Finance Committee of the Shanghai Bar Association (SHBA) and an Individual Member of the International Bar Association (IBA). Additionally, he serves as an Arbitrator of the Zibo Arbitration Commission, a Mediator of the People's Mediation Committee of the Shanghai Financial Leasing Association (SLA) and the Shanghai Pudong New Area Shangtong Commercial Mediation Center of the Shanghai Commercial Factoring Association (SCFA).
