Editorial | Further Steps Needed in Open-Door Legislation

社论｜开门立法须更进一步

The revision of China's Public Security Administration Punishments Law, which was open for public comment, has concluded. Data from the National People's Congress (NPC) website shows that more than 99,000 people submitted over 126,000 suggestions online. The period for public comment ran from September 1 to 30, with more than 70,000 suggestions received in the first eight days alone. Less than halfway through the month, nearly 100,000 people had already submitted over 114,000 suggestions online. The NPC Standing Committee's Legal Affairs Commission responded by saying that "public input on draft laws through normal channels is a concrete manifestation of the public's concern and orderly participation in national legislative work. It is of great significance and we sincerely welcome it." This attitude has been warmly received by the public. Beyond the formal submissions, there has been even more fervent attention and discussion at the societal level. This demonstrates how deeply this law revision affects public rights and interests and touches their emotions.

The Public Security Administration Punishment Law, also known as the "Minor Criminal Law," covers all aspects of citizens' rights. This revision is the first major overhaul of the law since it was implemented 17 years ago. The public's concern, or skepticism, ultimately stems from fears about the imbalance of power and rights contained in some provisions, which could lead to unexpected and uncontrollable consequences that no one can ignore. More than 100,000 suggestions reflect the public's concern for the law and their own rights. Legislators should not find it difficult to perceive the safety anxieties behind these suggestions. Therefore, revisions to the Public Security Administration Punishment Law should fully listen to and respect public opinion, further summarize and reflect on how to better open up legislation through institutional construction, and effectively assist in legislation and law enforcement. The whole process of open legislation should undoubtedly be an important manifestation of "people's democracy throughout the process."

Several provisions in the draft bill have drawn particular attention from the public. For instance, the draft stipulates that, in order to identify certain characteristics, injury conditions or physiological states of individuals who violate public security management regulations or victims, police officers can extract biometric identification information such as portraits and fingerprints, as well as biological samples like blood and urine from both parties involved. This can be done with the approval of the head of the department handling the case and through a certain procedure, it can even be collected forcibly. However, if there is an overemphasis on collection without adequate protection and lack of regulatory mechanisms, this could pose significant risks. Another provision under scrutiny is one that may result in detention and fines for those who wear or display clothing or symbols in public places that are deemed damaging to the spirit of the Chinese nation or hurtful to national sentiments. Many legal experts have pointed out that this clause is vague and could lead to arbitrary law enforcement. It could also stir up conflicts between different groups. The draft also allows a single police officer to make decisions on public security management penalties on the spot, raising concerns about procedural justice.