The Supreme People’s Court and the People’s Procuratorates: Judicial Supervision, Legal Interpretation, and Public Prosecution

The Supreme People’s Court and the People’s Procuratorates: Judicial Supervision, Legal Interpretation, and Public Prosecution

Introduction

The Supreme People’s Court (SPC) and the people’s procuratorates occupy two distinct but closely connected positions within the constitutional and judicial structure of the People’s Republic of China. The Supreme People’s Court is the country’s highest adjudicative organ. The people’s procuratorates, led by the Supreme People’s Procuratorate (SPP), are state organs responsible for legal supervision, public prosecution and other functions established by national legislation.

Understanding these institutions requires more than identifying their positions within the judicial hierarchy. Their responsibilities extend beyond the conventional functions of courts and prosecutors in many other legal systems. The Supreme People’s Court supervises adjudicative work throughout the country, develops judicial interpretations and provides guidance on the application of national legislation. The procuratorates, meanwhile, participate in criminal proceedings from the investigation and arrest-review stages through prosecution and post-judgment supervision. They also supervise specified aspects of civil and administrative litigation and may initiate public-interest litigation to protect national and social public interests.

The constitutional relationship between the two institutions is particularly significant. Courts determine cases through adjudication, while procuratorates exercise procuratorial power and legal-supervision functions. In criminal proceedings, their responsibilities are coordinated with those of public security organs and, in specified cases, state security organs. The Constitution requires these institutions to divide their functions, coordinate their activities and exercise mutual checks to promote the correct and effective enforcement of law.

The system is not based on a conventional separation of powers. The Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate are both responsible to the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee, although their internal institutional structures and hierarchical relationships differ. Their formal constitutional responsibilities must also be understood within the broader political framework of the People’s Republic of China.

A particularly important recent development concerns procuratorial public-interest litigation. On 6 November 2026, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress adopted the Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation, China’s first dedicated statute governing this area. It is scheduled to enter into force on 1 January 2027. The legislation consolidates and develops a system that had previously evolved through procedural legislation, other sector-specific laws and institutional practice. Its adoption represents an important development in the legal responsibilities of the people’s procuratorates.

This article examines the constitutional status, institutional organisation and principal functions of the Supreme People’s Court and the people’s procuratorates. It explains judicial supervision, legal interpretation, criminal prosecution, civil and administrative procuratorial work, public-interest litigation and the practical relationship between these institutions.

1. Constitutional Foundations of the Supreme People’s Court and the People’s Procuratorates

1.1 The constitutional position of the Supreme People’s Court

The Constitution identifies the people’s courts as the adjudicative organs of the state.

Article 128 establishes their constitutional status, while Article 129 provides for the Supreme People’s Court, local people’s courts at various levels, military courts and other specialised people’s courts.

Article 132 identifies the Supreme People’s Court as the highest adjudicative organ. It supervises the adjudicative work of local people’s courts at all levels and specialised people’s courts. Higher-level people’s courts similarly supervise the adjudicative work of lower-level courts.

The Supreme People’s Court is therefore the highest institution within the national court hierarchy. Its authority extends beyond hearing individual cases. It also performs functions concerning the consistent application of legislation, judicial interpretation and the supervision of adjudicative practice.

Article 133 provides that the Supreme People’s Court is responsible to the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee. This constitutional relationship reflects the position of the courts within the national system of state institutions.

The Supreme People’s Court is not an ordinary government ministry and does not form part of the State Council. Its institutional responsibilities are judicial rather than executive.

1.2 The constitutional position of the people’s procuratorates

The Constitution gives the people’s procuratorates a different institutional identity.

Article 134 describes them as the legal-supervision organs of the state. Article 135 establishes the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, local people’s procuratorates at various levels, military procuratorates and other specialised procuratorates.

Article 137 identifies the Supreme People’s Procuratorate as the highest procuratorial organ. It directs the work of local and specialised people’s procuratorates, while higher-level procuratorates direct the work of lower-level procuratorates.

Under Article 138, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate is responsible to the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee. Local people’s procuratorates are responsible both to the state organs of power that established them and to higher-level people’s procuratorates.

This structure differs from the judicial supervision relationship between higher and lower people’s courts. Higher courts supervise adjudicative work, whereas higher procuratorates direct the procuratorial work of lower procuratorates.

The distinction is important because the two systems have different institutional functions and chains of responsibility.

1.3 Constitutional independence

Article 131 provides that people’s courts independently exercise adjudicative power in accordance with law and are not subject to interference by administrative organs, social organisations or individuals.

Article 136 provides a corresponding constitutional principle for the people’s procuratorates, which independently exercise procuratorial power in accordance with law.

These provisions establish protections against interference by administrative bodies and other external actors in the exercise of judicial and procuratorial functions.

However, constitutional independence should not be interpreted as meaning that the institutions operate within a conventional model of complete separation between the judiciary, executive and legislature. The Chinese constitutional system recognises the leadership of the Communist Party of China and places the courts and procuratorates within a wider structure of state institutions.

The distinction between formal institutional independence in the exercise of legal functions and the broader political organisation of the state is essential to an accurate understanding of the Chinese system.

1.4 The relationship between courts, procuratorates and public security organs

Article 140 of the Constitution establishes a specific principle for criminal proceedings.

The people’s courts, people’s procuratorates and public security organs must divide their functions, take responsibility for their respective work, coordinate their activities and exercise mutual checks to ensure the correct and effective enforcement of law.

This arrangement is reflected in the Criminal Procedure Law.

Public security organs generally conduct criminal investigations, carry out detention and execute arrests in accordance with law. People’s procuratorates exercise procuratorial functions, including reviewing applications for arrest approval and deciding whether to initiate public prosecution. People’s courts determine criminal cases through adjudication.

The allocation is not absolute in every circumstance. People’s procuratorates have legally defined investigative powers in certain cases, while state security organs perform specified criminal investigation functions.

Nevertheless, the constitutional principle is clear: investigation, prosecution and adjudication are separate institutional responsibilities, even though they form part of a coordinated criminal justice process.

2. The Supreme People’s Court: Organisation and Institutional Responsibilities

2.1 The highest adjudicative organ

The Supreme People’s Court stands at the top of China’s four-level ordinary court hierarchy.

The ordinary structure consists of:

1. Primary people’s courts.
2. Intermediate people’s courts.
3. High people’s courts.
4. The Supreme People’s Court.

Specialised people’s courts operate alongside the ordinary territorial hierarchy and exercise jurisdiction over particular categories of disputes.

The Supreme People’s Court supervises the adjudicative work of these institutions and performs functions assigned to it by the Constitution, the Organic Law of the People’s Courts and other national legislation.

Its responsibilities include hearing cases within its jurisdiction, supervising lower courts, issuing judicial interpretations, publishing guiding cases and supporting the consistent administration of justice.

2.2 The President of the Supreme People’s Court

The President of the Supreme People’s Court is elected by the National People’s Congress.

The President’s term corresponds to that of the National People’s Congress, and the Constitution limits the President to two consecutive terms.

The President represents the Supreme People’s Court in the exercise of its institutional responsibilities and performs functions established by law.

The position should not be confused with that of the Procurator-General of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate. They are the heads of separate constitutional institutions.

2.3 The adjudication committees

The Supreme People’s Court has an adjudication committee, which performs functions defined by the Organic Law of the People’s Courts.

Adjudication committees consider significant or difficult legal matters and perform institutional functions relating to judicial policy, adjudicative consistency and other issues within their statutory responsibilities.

They are not ordinary trial panels. Their role is connected to the internal organisation and supervision of adjudicative work.

The relationship between the adjudication committee, individual judges and collegial panels forms part of China’s judicial accountability structure.

2.4 Judicial divisions and specialised functions

The Supreme People’s Court has internal divisions dealing with different categories of cases.

These include divisions responsible for civil, criminal, administrative, intellectual property and other matters, together with specialised bodies dealing with enforcement and judicial administration.

The precise internal structure may change through institutional reforms and administrative arrangements. Its central purpose is to enable the Court to manage its nationwide responsibilities across different fields of law.

The Supreme People’s Court also has a specialised intellectual property appellate structure and the China International Commercial Court, which forms part of the Court’s institutional framework for designated international commercial disputes.

2.5 The Supreme People’s Court’s relationship with lower courts

The Supreme People’s Court supervises the adjudicative work of local and specialised people’s courts.

This supervision does not mean that every judgment issued by a lower court is automatically reviewed by the Supreme People’s Court. Most cases are handled through the ordinary jurisdictional and appellate structure.

The SPC’s supervisory function includes developing judicial interpretations, promoting consistent application of law, addressing important legal questions and exercising judicial supervision powers in cases meeting the statutory conditions.

It also publishes judicial information and typical or guiding cases to communicate approaches to recurring legal issues.

3. Judicial Supervision and the Administration of Justice

3.1 The meaning of judicial supervision

Judicial supervision in China refers to the institutional mechanisms through which higher courts oversee adjudicative work and through which legally effective decisions may be reconsidered under specified conditions.

It is important to distinguish judicial supervision from ordinary appeals.

An appeal is part of the regular procedural structure through which a party challenges a first-instance judgment or ruling. Judicial supervision concerns institutional oversight and exceptional review mechanisms designed to address particular legal or procedural problems.

The Supreme People’s Court exercises supervisory authority over the nationwide court system, while higher-level local courts supervise lower courts within their jurisdictions.

3.2 The adjudication supervision procedure

The Civil Procedure Law and Criminal Procedure Law provide mechanisms for reviewing legally effective decisions where statutory grounds exist.

In civil cases, a party may apply for retrial in accordance with the Civil Procedure Law. A court may also initiate a retrial procedure through the legally established supervision framework.

The grounds for retrial are not unlimited. They may concern serious errors in the application of law, significant problems relating to evidence, procedural violations or other circumstances recognised by legislation.

Criminal proceedings also provide procedures for reviewing legally effective judgments and rulings where statutory conditions are met.

The purpose is to correct serious errors without converting the ordinary appellate system into an unlimited sequence of appeals.

3.3 The role of higher courts

Higher people’s courts may examine cases within their jurisdiction through ordinary appellate proceedings and judicial supervision mechanisms.

They also provide guidance to lower courts on the application of legislation and the administration of adjudicative work.

The Supreme People’s Court may intervene in particular cases under the powers conferred by law, but it is not a general court of appeal for every dispute in the country.

Its national supervisory function is exercised through a combination of adjudication, judicial interpretation, case guidance and institutional oversight.

3.4 Judicial supervision and enforcement

Supervision extends to the enforcement of judgments and other legally effective judicial documents.

A court judgment may establish a legal obligation, but the practical effectiveness of the judicial system depends on whether that obligation is carried out.

The people’s courts therefore have enforcement responsibilities and may take measures authorised by law to implement judgments and rulings.

Procuratorates also have a legal-supervision role in relation to specified enforcement activities. This means that enforcement is not solely a matter of administrative execution by the courts; it is also subject to legally defined procuratorial oversight.

4. The Supreme People’s Court and Legal Interpretation

4.1 The distinction between legislation and judicial interpretation

Legal interpretation is an important feature of the Chinese legal system, but the expression covers different institutional activities.

The National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee exercise legislative powers. The Standing Committee also has constitutional authority to interpret the Constitution and laws.

The Supreme People’s Court, by contrast, issues judicial interpretations concerning the application of laws in adjudicative work.

The Supreme People’s Procuratorate performs procuratorial functions and may issue interpretations and normative documents concerning the application of law within its statutory responsibilities.

These forms of interpretation must not be confused with the adoption of national legislation.

A judicial interpretation does not ordinarily create a new national statute. It clarifies how existing legislation should be understood and applied within the relevant legal functions.

4.2 The legal basis of judicial interpretations

The authority of the Supreme People’s Court to issue judicial interpretations is recognised by the Organic Law of the People’s Courts and the Law on Legislation.

Judicial interpretations address questions arising in the application of national laws in judicial proceedings.

They are particularly important where legislative provisions are broad, technical, incomplete or subject to differing interpretations in practice.

For example, the Supreme People’s Court may issue interpretations concerning:

• Contract formation and performance.
• Civil liability.
• Company law.
• Property rights.
• Intellectual property.
• Criminal responsibility.
• Criminal evidence.
• Civil procedure.
• Administrative litigation.
• Enforcement of judgments.
• Foreign-related civil and commercial disputes.

Such interpretations are intended to promote consistency in the application of national legislation.

4.3 The process of developing judicial interpretations

Judicial interpretations are developed through institutional procedures involving research, consultation, drafting and review.

The Supreme People’s Court may examine recurring legal questions arising from lower-court decisions, identify inconsistent approaches and determine whether formal interpretative guidance is required.

The process may involve consultation with relevant institutions, legal professionals, academics and other interested bodies, depending on the subject and nature of the interpretation.

Judicial interpretations are issued in formally recognised instruments and are published through official channels.

The legal status and application of a particular interpretation depend on its content, legal basis and the relevant procedural framework.

4.4 Judicial interpretations and statutory hierarchy

Judicial interpretations operate within the framework of national legislation.

They cannot legitimately replace the legislative authority of the National People’s Congress or its Standing Committee, nor can they override higher-ranking legal provisions.

Where an interpretation appears inconsistent with a statute or another higher-ranking legal instrument, questions of legal validity and the appropriate mechanisms for review may arise.

This is one reason why the distinction between legislation and judicial interpretation is essential.

The Supreme People’s Court contributes to the practical development of Chinese law, but it is not a legislature in the conventional sense.

4.5 Joint judicial interpretations

The Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate may issue joint judicial interpretations in areas where their respective responsibilities intersect.

This is particularly relevant in criminal law, criminal procedure and other fields involving both adjudicative and procuratorial functions.

Joint interpretations can help establish consistent approaches to legal questions that arise during investigation, prosecution and adjudication.

However, the institutions remain distinct. A joint interpretation does not merge their powers or eliminate the separate responsibilities of judges and procurators.

4.6 Guiding cases and judicial guidance

The Supreme People’s Court also operates a guiding-case system.

Guiding cases are selected decisions published to illustrate the application of law to significant or recurring legal questions.

They help promote consistency in judicial reasoning and provide lower courts with reference points when dealing with similar disputes.

China’s guiding-case system should not be equated with the common-law doctrine of binding precedent. The legal system does not generally operate through a rule that every decision of a higher court automatically binds all lower courts as precedent in the common-law sense.

Guiding cases nevertheless have institutional significance. Courts are expected to refer to them when adjudicating similar matters under the applicable rules.

The Supreme People’s Court also publishes typical cases, which illustrate how legislation has been applied in particular circumstances.

4.7 Interpretation and the development of commercial law

Judicial interpretation is particularly influential in commercial law.

Modern business relationships frequently involve complex transactions, financial products, digital platforms, intellectual property, corporate governance and international contractual arrangements.

Legislation cannot always anticipate every factual variation arising from commercial practice.

The Supreme People’s Court’s interpretations therefore help clarify the application of substantive and procedural rules to new or recurring categories of disputes.

For businesses operating in China, judicial interpretations may be as important as the statutory text when assessing how a particular legal rule is likely to be applied by a people’s court.

5. The Supreme People’s Procuratorate: Organisation and Constitutional Position

5.1 The highest procuratorial organ

The Supreme People’s Procuratorate is the highest institution within the people’s procuratorate system.

It directs the work of local people’s procuratorates and specialised procuratorates, including military procuratorates.

Its constitutional responsibilities are established by Articles 134–138 of the Constitution, while the Organic Law of the People’s Procuratorates provides the principal institutional framework.

The SPP performs functions relating to criminal investigation in legally specified cases, review of arrest applications, decisions on prosecution, public prosecution, legal supervision and public-interest litigation.

Its role is broader than that of a conventional public prosecution service concerned exclusively with criminal trials.

5.2 The Procurator-General

The Procurator-General heads the Supreme People’s Procuratorate.

The Procurator-General is elected by the National People’s Congress, and the appointment is subject to the constitutional and statutory procedures.

The term corresponds to that of the National People’s Congress, and the Constitution limits the Procurator-General to two consecutive terms.

The Procurator-General represents the institution and exercises leadership functions within the procuratorial system.

5.3 Local people’s procuratorates

The procuratorate system is organised through different territorial and specialised levels.

It includes procuratorates at provincial, municipal and primary levels, together with specialised procuratorates established under national law.

The relationship between higher and lower procuratorates is hierarchical. Higher-level procuratorates direct the work of lower-level institutions.

This differs from the relationship between higher and lower people’s courts, which is expressed constitutionally in terms of supervision of adjudicative work.

5.4 Procuratorial committees

People’s procuratorates have procuratorial committees that perform functions established by the Organic Law of the People’s Procuratorates.

These committees discuss significant or difficult cases and other important matters relating to procuratorial work.

The internal structure of procuratorates also includes departments responsible for criminal prosecution, civil and administrative procuratorial work, public-interest litigation and other specialised functions.

The exact organisational structure may vary as institutional responsibilities develop.

5.5 Procurators and professional responsibility

Procurators are legal professionals responsible for exercising procuratorial powers in accordance with the law.

The Procurators Law regulates their duties, rights, obligations, appointment and professional responsibilities.

Procurators are expected to act on the basis of facts and law, protect lawful rights and interests and perform their responsibilities impartially.

They are also subject to a system of professional accountability. Procurators are responsible for decisions made within the scope of their legal powers.

The internal organisation of procuratorates combines professional case-handling responsibilities with institutional leadership and supervision.

6. The Principal Functions of the People’s Procuratorates

6.1 Criminal prosecution

Public prosecution is one of the central functions of the people’s procuratorates.

In criminal cases, the procuratorate examines whether the available evidence and legal circumstances justify bringing a criminal charge before a people’s court.

The decision to prosecute is distinct from the decision to convict. A procuratorate may initiate public prosecution, but only a competent people’s court determines criminal guilt through adjudication.

This distinction is essential to the constitutional allocation of responsibilities.

6.2 Review of arrest applications

The procuratorates exercise important powers in relation to arrest.

Where public security organs seek approval for an arrest, the relevant people’s procuratorate examines the application and determines whether the legal conditions are satisfied.

This function is intended to provide a form of legal review before arrest is authorised in the circumstances governed by the Criminal Procedure Law.

Arrest is not simply a routine consequence of investigation. It must comply with the statutory requirements and procedures.

6.3 Investigation in specified cases

People’s procuratorates have investigative powers in certain cases assigned to them by law.

These powers are not equivalent to a general authority to investigate every criminal offence.

The principal responsibility for ordinary criminal investigations generally rests with public security organs, while procuratorates investigate categories of cases falling within their legally defined jurisdiction.

6.4 Supervision of criminal proceedings

The procuratorates supervise specified aspects of criminal proceedings to assess whether legal requirements have been observed.

This may include supervision of investigation, detention, arrest, prosecution, adjudication and enforcement of criminal judgments.

The purpose is to promote lawful procedure and address violations identified within the scope of procuratorial authority.

6.5 Civil and administrative legal supervision

The procuratorates also perform functions in civil and administrative litigation.

They may supervise specified judicial activities, examine legally effective decisions in circumstances recognised by law, lodge protests and issue procuratorial recommendations.

These functions are intended to address serious legal problems and promote lawful adjudication and enforcement.

6.6 Public-interest litigation

The people’s procuratorates may initiate public-interest litigation in areas defined by legislation.

This function has developed into an important part of the procuratorial system and now has a dedicated statutory framework adopted in November 2026.

The distinction between the different categories of procuratorial work is important: criminal prosecution, civil supervision, administrative supervision and public-interest litigation are related institutional functions, but they are not interchangeable.

7. Public Prosecution and the Chinese Criminal Justice Process

7.1 The role of the procuratorate

Public prosecution is the process through which the state brings a criminal charge before a people’s court.

The procuratorate examines the case materials, assesses the evidence and determines whether the legal requirements for prosecution are met.

The process is governed principally by the Criminal Procedure Law.

A public prosecution is not a private lawsuit brought by an individual claimant. It is a formal criminal proceeding conducted by the state through the competent procuratorial organ.

7.2 The relationship between investigation and prosecution

In the ordinary criminal justice process, public security organs investigate suspected offences and collect evidence.

When the investigation is completed, the case may be transferred to the procuratorate for examination and a decision on prosecution.

The procuratorate evaluates whether the facts are sufficiently established, whether the evidence is reliable and sufficient, whether the alleged conduct constitutes an offence and whether criminal responsibility should be pursued.

The procuratorate may decide to initiate public prosecution, decline prosecution where the legal conditions apply or return the case for supplementary investigation in accordance with law.

7.3 Examination for prosecution

The examination-for-prosecution stage is a significant procedural safeguard.

The procuratorate must consider the evidence and legal circumstances rather than simply accepting the conclusions of the investigative authority.

The examination may involve reviewing documentary evidence, questioning relevant individuals, hearing explanations and assessing whether the investigation has been conducted lawfully.

The procuratorate must also consider whether the evidence supports the proposed charge and whether other relevant offences or suspects have been omitted.

The decision is governed by the Criminal Procedure Law and the applicable evidentiary standards.

7.4 Decisions to prosecute or not to prosecute

The procuratorate may decide to initiate public prosecution where the statutory conditions are satisfied.

It may also decide not to prosecute in circumstances recognised by law.

Chinese criminal procedure distinguishes between different legal grounds for non-prosecution, including circumstances where criminal responsibility should not be pursued and circumstances involving insufficient evidence.

The legal consequences differ according to the ground on which the decision is made.

A decision not to prosecute is therefore not necessarily equivalent to a finding that the alleged conduct never occurred. It reflects the applicable procedural and substantive requirements for bringing a criminal charge.

7.5 The public prosecutor in court

Where a public prosecution is initiated, the procuratorate sends the case to the competent people’s court.

A procurator appears in court on behalf of the state and presents the prosecution’s case.

The prosecutor introduces evidence, explains the alleged offence, responds to the defence and participates in the proceedings.

The court independently determines whether the prosecution has established criminal responsibility under the applicable law.

The prosecutor does not decide the verdict and cannot substitute the prosecutorial position for the judicial decision.

7.6 The right to defence

The Constitution recognises the accused person’s right to defence.

Criminal procedure also provides rules concerning legal representation, evidence, hearings and the rights of the accused.

The procuratorate’s role in public prosecution does not remove the court’s responsibility to adjudicate the case according to law.

The prosecution must present evidence and legal arguments, while the defence is entitled to challenge the prosecution’s case and exercise procedural rights under the Criminal Procedure Law.

7.7 Criminal appeals and protests

Where a party challenges a first-instance criminal judgment, the ordinary appellate system applies.

The procuratorate may also lodge a protest against a legally relevant judgment or ruling in circumstances provided by law.

A procuratorial protest is an institutional procedural mechanism through which the procuratorate seeks review of a judicial decision.

It should not be confused with an ordinary appeal filed by the defendant or another party.

The appellate court examines the case under the applicable criminal procedure rules and issues the appropriate decision.

8. Procuratorial Supervision of Criminal Justice

8.1 Supervision of investigations

The procuratorates supervise specified aspects of criminal investigations to ensure that investigative activities comply with law.

This may involve examining whether detention, evidence collection, questioning and other investigative measures comply with the Criminal Procedure Law.

Where a procuratorate identifies a legal violation within its supervisory jurisdiction, it may take measures authorised by law, including issuing procuratorial opinions or recommendations.

This supervisory role is particularly important because the investigation stage may affect the rights and procedural position of the person suspected of an offence.

8.2 Review of arrest decisions

The procuratorate’s role in reviewing arrest applications provides an additional institutional check within the criminal justice process.

The decision must be based on the legal requirements governing arrest rather than the mere existence of suspicion.

The relevant procuratorate examines the case materials and determines whether the statutory conditions have been met.

This is one of the clearest examples of the division of responsibilities between investigative authorities and procuratorial institutions.

8.3 Supervision of criminal adjudication

The procuratorates may supervise judicial activities in criminal proceedings.

Where a legally effective judgment or ruling contains a serious problem recognised by law, the procuratorate may use the appropriate protest or other statutory procedure.

The purpose is to address legal errors and promote the correct application of criminal law.

This function does not mean that procurators can routinely reverse judgments. The authority to adjudicate remains with the people’s courts.

8.4 Supervision of criminal punishment enforcement

Procuratorial supervision also extends to specified aspects of the enforcement of criminal judgments and the administration of prisons and detention facilities.

The procuratorates may examine whether the execution of criminal punishment complies with the law and whether the lawful rights of persons serving sentences or held in detention are respected.

This function connects the criminal trial process with the subsequent administration of criminal justice.

9. Civil and Administrative Procuratorial Supervision

9.1 Civil procuratorial supervision

The people’s procuratorates have a role in supervising civil litigation.

Their functions may include examining legally effective civil judgments, rulings and mediation documents where the statutory conditions are met.

They may also supervise specified civil enforcement activities and address serious procedural or legal problems.

This role does not make the procuratorate a general representative of one party in private civil litigation.

Instead, it is an institutional supervisory function intended to promote lawful adjudication and the proper administration of civil justice.

9.2 Procuratorial protests in civil cases

A procuratorate may lodge a protest against a legally effective civil judgment or ruling in circumstances prescribed by law.

The protest is a mechanism for seeking judicial reconsideration where a serious legal issue or another recognised ground exists.

The court then examines the matter under the relevant procedural framework.

The protest procedure is distinct from the ordinary appeal process and is generally associated with judicial supervision.

9.3 Procuratorial recommendations

The procuratorates may also issue procuratorial recommendations in circumstances recognised by law.

A recommendation may identify a legal or procedural problem and request that the relevant institution take corrective action.

Procuratorial recommendations are not equivalent to court judgments. Their legal effect depends on the relevant statutory framework and the nature of the matter.

They nevertheless form an important part of the supervisory relationship between procuratorates and other legal institutions.

9.4 Administrative procuratorial supervision

Administrative procuratorial work concerns the supervision of specified administrative litigation and related judicial activities.

The procuratorates may examine legally effective administrative judgments and rulings and address certain problems involving the enforcement of administrative decisions or the administration of justice.

The purpose is to promote lawful administrative adjudication and the proper application of the Administrative Litigation Law.

Administrative procuratorial supervision should be distinguished from ordinary administrative supervision by government departments. Procuratorates are not executive regulators; they perform legal-supervision functions within their statutory jurisdiction.

9.5 The relationship with administrative reconsideration

Administrative reconsideration is a procedure through which an administrative authority reviews an administrative act under the applicable legislation.

Administrative litigation, by contrast, is adjudication by a people’s court.

Procuratorial supervision may arise in relation to specified administrative litigation matters, but it does not replace administrative reconsideration or the ordinary judicial process.

The institutional distinction is important when examining how individuals and organisations may challenge administrative conduct.

10. Procuratorial Public-Interest Litigation

10.1 Development of the system

Procuratorial public-interest litigation is one of the most distinctive developments in China’s modern procuratorial system.

It allows people’s procuratorates to initiate proceedings intended to protect national interests and social public interests where the statutory conditions are satisfied.

The system developed through pilot programmes beginning in 2015 and subsequent legislative amendments, including changes to the Civil Procedure Law and Administrative Litigation Law in 2017.

The Organic Law of the People’s Procuratorates, revised in 2018, expressly recognised public-interest litigation as one of the procuratorates’ functions.

Over time, sector-specific legislation and judicial practice expanded the areas in which procuratorial public-interest proceedings could be initiated.

10.2 The new Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation

On 6 November 2026, the Standing Committee of the 14th National People’s Congress adopted the Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation.

The statute contains 53 articles in six chapters and is scheduled to take effect on 1 January 2027.

It establishes a dedicated legal framework for procuratorial public-interest litigation, covering jurisdiction, investigation, commencement of proceedings, trial and enforcement.

The law is particularly significant because it consolidates a system that had previously been governed by provisions spread across different procedural and sector-specific statutes.

It also establishes more detailed requirements concerning the scope of cases, procedural safeguards, the relationship between procuratorates and administrative authorities and the rights of individuals and organisations involved in proceedings.

As of November 2026, the law has been adopted and promulgated but has not yet entered into force. Until 1 January 2027, the existing applicable statutory framework continues to govern proceedings.

10.3 Administrative public-interest litigation

Administrative public-interest litigation concerns circumstances in which an administrative authority unlawfully exercises its powers or fails to perform a statutory duty, causing harm to national or social public interests.

The new legislation identifies areas in which such proceedings may be brought, including environmental protection, food and drug safety, workplace safety, cultural heritage and the protection of specified groups.

Other areas include accessibility, the protection of minors, women, older persons and persons with disabilities, national defence interests and other legally defined public interests.

The purpose is not to allow procuratorates to replace administrative authorities in performing their ordinary functions.

Rather, the proceedings are designed to address unlawful administrative action or inaction that causes legally significant harm to public interests.

10.4 Civil public-interest litigation

Civil public-interest litigation may be directed against individuals, companies or other organisations whose unlawful conduct harms national or social public interests in areas covered by law.

The relevant fields include specified environmental and resource protection matters, food and drug safety, protection of national interests and other statutory categories.

The new legislation also addresses matters such as monopolistic conduct, unlawful processing of personal information affecting large numbers of people, certain labour-related public-interest concerns and infringements involving the names, images, reputations or honours of national heroes and martyrs.

The scope of proceedings is determined by the statute and relevant sector-specific legislation. It should not be assumed that every unlawful act or every private dispute may become a procuratorial public-interest case.

10.5 The pre-litigation procedure

One of the most important features of procuratorial public-interest litigation is the role of the pre-litigation procedure.

Before initiating certain proceedings, the procuratorate must take legally prescribed steps intended to give the relevant authority or organisation an opportunity to address the problem.

In administrative public-interest cases, this may involve communication with the administrative authority and the issuance of a formal procuratorial recommendation identifying the alleged unlawful conduct, the harm to public interests and the corrective action sought.

In civil public-interest cases, where other legally authorised institutions or organisations may bring proceedings, the procuratorate must follow the statutory procedures designed to encourage or notify those bodies to act.

This structure reflects the principle that litigation should not automatically replace other legally available mechanisms for protecting public interests.

10.6 The limits of procuratorial investigative powers

The new legislation also defines the boundaries of procuratorial investigations in public-interest cases.

Procuratorates may investigate and collect evidence through legally authorised means, including inquiries, inspections and the collection of relevant materials.

However, the law places limits on the use of coercive measures in these proceedings. Procuratorial public-interest investigations should not be treated as an unrestricted power to seize property, freeze assets or restrict personal liberty.

The procuratorate must also respect the lawful rights and interests of individuals, companies and other organisations.

These safeguards are important because public-interest litigation can involve private businesses, administrative authorities and individuals whose conduct is under investigation.

10.7 The court’s role in public-interest litigation

A procuratorate that initiates public-interest litigation must present its case before a competent people’s court.

The court determines whether the statutory requirements are satisfied and whether the requested relief is justified.

Depending on the nature of the proceedings, the requested remedies may include requiring an administrative authority to perform a statutory duty, declaring an administrative act unlawful, stopping harmful conduct, restoring damaged conditions or awarding compensation.

The procuratorate’s role as claimant does not remove the court’s responsibility to adjudicate the case independently in accordance with the applicable procedural law.

10.8 Foreign-related public-interest litigation

The new Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation also addresses unlawful conduct by foreign organisations or individuals that harms China’s national or social public interests.

Article 52 provides for the possibility of procuratorial public-interest proceedings in such circumstances.

This provision does not create a general jurisdiction over every foreign individual or enterprise operating in China. Its application depends on the statutory conditions and the existence of conduct falling within the law’s scope.

For international businesses, it is important to understand that public-interest litigation is a distinct mechanism from ordinary private commercial litigation and may arise in areas such as environmental protection, consumer interests, data protection and other legally defined public concerns.

11. The Relationship Between the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate

11.1 Separate constitutional institutions

The Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate are separate constitutional institutions.

The SPC is responsible for adjudication and judicial supervision. The SPP exercises procuratorial power, public prosecution and legal-supervision functions.

Neither institution is simply a department of the other.

The Supreme People’s Court does not direct the work of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate does not generally control the adjudicative decisions of the courts.

Their relationship is based on distinct constitutional responsibilities and statutory procedures.

11.2 Cooperation in criminal proceedings

The relationship is particularly visible in criminal justice.

The procuratorate examines criminal cases and decides whether public prosecution should be initiated. The court then determines the case through adjudication.

The procuratorate may also lodge protests or exercise other supervisory powers in circumstances provided by law.

The court, in turn, must determine the case according to the evidence and applicable legal rules rather than treating the prosecution’s position as conclusive.

This institutional arrangement reflects the constitutional principle of divided responsibilities, coordination and mutual checks.

11.3 Joint interpretations and procedural coordination

The SPC and SPP may cooperate in developing interpretations or procedural arrangements in fields where their functions overlap.

Joint interpretations can address questions arising across the criminal justice process or in other areas requiring consistent institutional practice.

However, joint institutional activity does not remove the need to distinguish between the role of the prosecutor and that of the judge.

The prosecutor presents and supports the case within the scope of prosecutorial authority; the court adjudicates.

11.4 Procuratorial supervision of court proceedings

The procuratorates have statutory authority to supervise specified judicial activities.

This may include the use of protests, procuratorial recommendations and other legally recognised mechanisms.

The supervisory role is not equivalent to an unrestricted power to overturn judgments or direct judges to reach particular conclusions.

The court retains its adjudicative responsibility, while the procuratorate performs the supervisory functions assigned by law.

11.5 Accountability to the National People’s Congress

Both the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate are responsible to the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee.

Their presidents or heads are appointed through the constitutional procedures associated with the National People’s Congress.

They report on their work and are subject to the forms of institutional oversight established by the Constitution and national legislation.

This relationship reflects the constitutional organisation of state authority in the People’s Republic of China.

12. The Role of the People’s Procuratorates in Protecting Rights and Public Interests

12.1 Protection of lawful rights and interests

The procuratorates’ legal-supervision responsibilities are connected to the protection of lawful rights and interests.

In criminal proceedings, this includes examining whether investigative and prosecutorial procedures comply with law and whether the evidence supports the proposed charge.

In civil and administrative matters, procuratorial supervision may address specified procedural and legal problems.

In public-interest litigation, the procuratorates act to protect interests that may not be adequately represented through ordinary private litigation.

12.2 Environmental protection

Environmental protection has become a major area of procuratorial public-interest litigation.

Cases may concern pollution, ecological damage, unlawful exploitation of natural resources and failures by administrative authorities to perform statutory duties.

Public-interest proceedings may seek to stop unlawful conduct, restore damaged environments or obtain compensation under the relevant legal framework.

The procuratorate’s role complements environmental legislation and the responsibilities of administrative environmental regulators.

12.3 Consumer and food safety

Food and drug safety are also important areas of public-interest protection.

Certain unlawful practices may affect large numbers of consumers, making individual litigation an insufficient response to the broader harm.

Procuratorial proceedings may therefore be used in circumstances recognised by law to address conduct that threatens public interests.

12.4 Personal information and digital interests

The development of digital commerce and online platforms has created new public-interest concerns.

Unlawful processing of personal information, particularly where large numbers of people are affected, may raise issues beyond an individual private dispute.

The new public-interest litigation legislation recognises specified categories of conduct involving personal information.

This development connects procuratorial supervision with China’s broader legal framework on data security and personal information protection.

12.5 Protection of vulnerable groups

The new legislation also recognises public-interest concerns involving specified groups, including minors, women, older persons and persons with disabilities.

These provisions are intended to address circumstances in which unlawful conduct or administrative inaction causes broader harm to protected interests.

The procuratorate’s role remains subject to the statutory scope of public-interest litigation and the procedural safeguards established by law.

13. Digitalisation and Modern Procuratorial Work

13.1 Electronic case management

The procuratorates have developed digital systems for case registration, document management, evidence handling and institutional supervision.

These systems support the administration of criminal, civil, administrative and public-interest litigation cases.

Digitalisation is also relevant to the management of case deadlines, internal review and professional accountability.

13.2 Digital evidence

Electronic evidence has become increasingly important in criminal and civil proceedings.

It may include electronic communications, financial records, platform data, digital contracts, transaction logs and other electronic materials.

Procurators must examine the relevance, authenticity and legal admissibility of evidence under the applicable procedural framework.

The increasing importance of digital evidence has also encouraged institutional cooperation between procuratorates, investigative authorities and courts.

13.3 Digital public-interest protection

Digitalisation has expanded the types of public-interest concerns that may come before procuratorates.

Examples include unlawful processing of personal information, online consumer protection issues and other forms of digital conduct that may harm broader public interests.

The new Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation provides a more developed statutory framework for specified categories of such cases.

13.4 Institutional case management

In September 2026, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate issued a guideline on full-process case management.

The document addresses the handling of cases from acceptance through processing, conclusion and archiving. It also clarifies responsibilities among procuratorial committees, chief procurators, case-handling departments and other institutional bodies.

The development reflects the continuing emphasis on case quality, procedural accountability and coordinated management across different categories of procuratorial work.

14. The Practical Importance of These Institutions for Individuals and Businesses

The Supreme People’s Court and people’s procuratorates influence the legal environment in which individuals, companies and public authorities operate.

For individuals, their functions affect criminal proceedings, the review of arrest applications, judicial appeals, legal supervision and the protection of specified public interests.

For businesses, the institutions are relevant to commercial litigation, intellectual property, regulatory compliance, criminal liability, environmental obligations, consumer protection and data governance.

Foreign companies operating in China should understand several institutional distinctions.

First, the Supreme People’s Court is the highest adjudicative organ, but it is not the ordinary first point of contact for most disputes. Civil and commercial cases are generally heard by the competent local or specialised people’s courts.

Second, the procuratorates are not courts. They may initiate public prosecution and exercise legal supervision, but they do not ordinarily decide whether a defendant is guilty.

Third, judicial interpretations issued by the Supreme People’s Court can have substantial practical significance in determining how legislation is applied by courts.

Fourth, public-interest litigation may concern companies whose conduct affects legally protected public interests. The new legislation, effective from January 2027, provides a dedicated framework for such proceedings and includes specified foreign-related situations.

Finally, the existence of procuratorial supervision does not mean that every individual or company may ask a procuratorate to reopen a case or intervene in a private dispute. Procuratorial powers are defined by legislation and exercised according to prescribed procedures.

For international businesses, understanding these institutions is part of understanding the broader Chinese legal environment. Their functions affect not only criminal justice but also the enforcement of legal obligations, judicial consistency and the protection of public interests.

Key Takeaways

1. The Supreme People’s Court is the highest adjudicative organ of the People’s Republic of China.
2. The Supreme People’s Procuratorate is the highest procuratorial organ and leads the national procuratorate system.
3. The Constitution identifies people’s courts as adjudicative organs and people’s procuratorates as legal-supervision organs.
4. The Supreme People’s Court supervises the adjudicative work of lower people’s courts and specialised courts.
5. The Supreme People’s Procuratorate directs the work of local and specialised people’s procuratorates.
6. Higher people’s courts supervise lower courts, while higher procuratorates direct the work of lower procuratorates.
7. Courts and procuratorates are separate constitutional institutions with distinct legal responsibilities.
8. Article 140 of the Constitution establishes the principle of divided responsibilities, coordination and mutual checks among courts, procuratorates and public security organs in criminal proceedings.
9. The Supreme People’s Court issues judicial interpretations concerning the application of legislation in adjudicative work.
10. Judicial interpretations are not equivalent to statutes enacted by the National People’s Congress or its Standing Committee.
11. The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress has constitutional authority to interpret the Constitution and laws.
12. The Supreme People’s Court also publishes guiding cases and typical cases to promote consistency in judicial practice.
13. China’s guiding-case system should not be equated with the common-law doctrine of binding precedent.
14. The Supreme People’s Court exercises judicial supervision through institutional oversight and legally defined review procedures.
15. Retrial and adjudication supervision procedures may allow certain legally effective decisions to be reconsidered.
16. The people’s procuratorates are responsible for public prosecution in criminal cases.
17. Procuratorates review applications for arrest approval and examine cases transferred for prosecution.
18. Procuratorates may investigate specified criminal cases within their statutory jurisdiction.
19. Public prosecutors present the state’s case before people’s courts, but courts determine guilt through adjudication.
20. Procuratorates supervise specified aspects of criminal investigation, adjudication and enforcement.
21. Procuratorial supervision also extends to certain civil and administrative litigation matters.
22. Procuratorates may lodge protests against legally effective judgments or rulings where statutory conditions are satisfied.
23. Procuratorial recommendations are supervisory instruments and are not equivalent to court judgments.
24. Procuratorial public-interest litigation developed through pilot programmes, procedural amendments and sector-specific legislation.
25. China’s Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation was adopted on 6 November 2026.
26. The new law contains 53 articles in six chapters and takes effect on 1 January 2027.
27. The new statute establishes a dedicated framework for administrative and civil procuratorial public-interest litigation.
28. Public-interest litigation may address specified matters involving environmental protection, food and drug safety, workplace safety, cultural heritage and the protection of vulnerable groups.
29. The new legislation also addresses certain public-interest concerns involving monopolistic practices and unlawful processing of personal information.
30. Pre-litigation procedures are an important feature of procuratorial public-interest litigation.
31. Procuratorial investigative powers in public-interest cases are subject to statutory limits and safeguards.
32. Public-interest proceedings are adjudicated by people’s courts, which determine the appropriate legal relief.
33. The Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate may issue joint interpretations in areas where their responsibilities intersect.
34. Both institutions are responsible to the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee.
35. The two institutions play different but complementary roles in the administration of justice and the enforcement of Chinese law.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the Supreme People’s Court of China?

The Supreme People’s Court is the highest adjudicative organ of the People’s Republic of China. It hears cases within its jurisdiction, supervises lower courts and issues judicial interpretations concerning the application of national legislation.

2. What is the Supreme People’s Procuratorate?

The Supreme People’s Procuratorate is the highest procuratorial organ in China. It directs local and specialised procuratorates and performs functions involving public prosecution, legal supervision and public-interest litigation.

3. Are the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate the same institution?

No. They are separate constitutional institutions. The Supreme People’s Court exercises adjudicative power, while the Supreme People’s Procuratorate exercises procuratorial power and legal-supervision functions.

4. What is the difference between a court and a procuratorate?

A people’s court adjudicates cases and issues judgments and rulings. A people’s procuratorate performs public prosecution and other legal-supervision functions established by law. In criminal proceedings, the procuratorate presents the prosecution’s case, while the court decides the case.

5. Who supervises the Supreme People’s Court?

The Supreme People’s Court is responsible to the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee. It is the highest adjudicative organ and is not supervised by another ordinary people’s court.

6. Who supervises the Supreme People’s Procuratorate?

The Supreme People’s Procuratorate is responsible to the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee. It directs the work of local and specialised procuratorates.

7. What is judicial supervision in China?

Judicial supervision refers to institutional oversight of adjudicative work and legally defined procedures for reviewing certain decisions. It includes the supervision exercised by higher courts and the exceptional retrial mechanisms established by procedural legislation.

8. Can the Supreme People’s Court review every case in China?

No. Most cases are handled by local or specialised courts under the ordinary jurisdictional structure. The Supreme People’s Court hears cases within its legally defined jurisdiction and performs nationwide supervisory and interpretative functions.

9. What are judicial interpretations?

Judicial interpretations are formal interpretations issued by the Supreme People’s Court concerning the application of legislation in adjudicative work. They clarify legal rules and promote consistency in judicial practice.

10. Can the Supreme People’s Court create national laws?

The Supreme People’s Court is not a legislature. National legislation is adopted by the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee, while the Supreme People’s Court issues judicial interpretations within its statutory authority.

11. Does China have binding judicial precedent?

China does not generally operate under the common-law doctrine of binding precedent. However, guiding cases and typical cases published by the Supreme People’s Court influence judicial practice and support consistent application of legislation.

12. What is the role of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate in criminal proceedings?

It reviews criminal cases, examines applications for arrest approval, decides whether to initiate public prosecution in cases within its jurisdiction, presents prosecutions before courts and supervises specified aspects of criminal proceedings.

13. Do procurators decide whether a defendant is guilty?

No. Procurators present and support the prosecution’s case, but the people’s court determines criminal guilt through adjudication.

14. Can a procuratorate investigate a criminal offence?

Yes, in categories of cases assigned to procuratorates by law. Ordinary criminal investigations are generally conducted by public security organs, subject to the statutory division of responsibilities.

15. Can a procuratorate refuse to prosecute a case?

Yes. A procuratorate may decide not to initiate prosecution where the statutory conditions are satisfied, including circumstances involving insufficient evidence or other legal grounds for non-prosecution.

16. What is procuratorial supervision of criminal proceedings?

It is the exercise of legal-supervision powers over specified aspects of investigation, detention, arrest, prosecution, adjudication and criminal punishment enforcement.

17. Can procuratorates challenge court judgments?

Yes. They may lodge protests against specified judgments or rulings where the legal conditions for doing so are satisfied. The relevant court then examines the matter under the applicable procedural rules.

18. Do procuratorates supervise civil cases?

Yes. They may supervise specified civil adjudicative and enforcement activities, examine legally effective decisions in appropriate circumstances and use protests or procuratorial recommendations where authorised by law.

19. What is administrative procuratorial supervision?

It is the exercise of procuratorial legal-supervision functions in relation to specified administrative litigation and related judicial activities. It is distinct from ordinary administrative regulation by government departments.

20. What is procuratorial public-interest litigation?

It is a legal mechanism through which people’s procuratorates may initiate civil or administrative proceedings to protect national interests and social public interests in areas defined by law.

21. When was China’s Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation adopted?

The Standing Committee of the 14th National People’s Congress adopted the law on 6 November 2026.

22. When does the new Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation enter into force?

It is scheduled to enter into force on 1 January 2027. Until then, the existing statutory framework continues to govern procuratorial public-interest litigation.

23. What subjects are covered by the new public-interest litigation law?

The law establishes procedures for administrative and civil public-interest litigation. Its subject areas include specified matters involving environmental protection, food and drug safety, workplace safety, cultural heritage, vulnerable groups, personal information and other legally defined public interests.

24. Can a company become a defendant in procuratorial public-interest litigation?

Yes, where its conduct falls within the statutory scope and the legal conditions for proceedings are satisfied. The law also recognises certain public-interest proceedings involving foreign organisations or individuals.

25. Can procuratorates replace administrative authorities in public-interest cases?

No. The new legislation expressly requires procuratorates not to interfere with or replace administrative authorities in the lawful exercise of their functions. Procuratorial proceedings are intended to address legally defined failures or unlawful conduct affecting public interests.

26. Do procuratorates have unlimited powers to investigate public-interest cases?

No. Their investigative powers are established by law and subject to statutory limitations and safeguards. The new legislation regulates the collection of evidence and protects the lawful rights and interests of individuals and organisations.

27. What is the difference between a procuratorial recommendation and a court judgment?

A procuratorial recommendation is a supervisory instrument issued by a procuratorate within its legal authority. A court judgment is an adjudicative decision issued by a competent people’s court. Their legal character and consequences are different.

28. Are the Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate politically independent?

They have constitutional and statutory independence in the exercise of their respective legal functions, including protections against interference by administrative organs, social organisations and individuals. However, they operate within the broader constitutional and political structure of the People’s Republic of China, which recognises the leadership of the Communist Party.

29. Do the Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate issue joint interpretations?

They may issue joint judicial interpretations in areas where their responsibilities intersect. Such instruments help promote consistent application of law across adjudicative and procuratorial work.

30. Why are these institutions important for foreign businesses?

Their functions influence criminal enforcement, commercial litigation, intellectual property disputes, judicial interpretation, data protection, environmental compliance and public-interest litigation. Foreign companies operating in China should understand the distinction between court adjudication, public prosecution and procuratorial supervision.

Authoritative Legal Sources and Further Reading

1. Constitution of the People’s Republic of China (2018) — particularly Articles 128–140, covering the constitutional status, functions and institutional relationships of people’s courts and people’s procuratorates.
   https://en.npc.gov.cn.cdurl.cn/2018-03/11/c_1145393.htm
2. Organic Law of the People’s Courts of the People’s Republic of China — the principal legislation governing the organisation, responsibilities and powers of the people’s courts.
   https://english.court.gov.cn/basicfactsofcourts.html
3. Organic Law of the People’s Procuratorates of the People’s Republic of China — establishes the procuratorates’ legal-supervision functions, institutional organisation and statutory powers.
   https://en.spp.gov.cn/2018-10/26/c_1096275.htm
4. Procurators Law of the People’s Republic of China — regulates the professional responsibilities, duties and rights of procurators.
   https://en.spp.gov.cn/2019-04/23/c_948430.htm
5. Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China — governs criminal investigation, arrest approval, examination for prosecution, public prosecution, adjudication and criminal procedural safeguards.
   https://en.npc.gov.cn.cdurl.cn/2018-10/26/c_674703.htm
6. Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation of the People’s Republic of China (2026) — adopted on 6 November 2026 and effective from 1 January 2027. The published Chinese text is available through the People’s Daily.
   https://society.people.com.cn/n1/2026/1110/c1008-40830880.html
7. Supreme People’s Procuratorate — Public Interest Litigation Prosecution — official institutional materials concerning the development and operation of procuratorial public-interest litigation.
   https://en.spp.gov.cn/publicinterestlitigationprosecution.html
8. Supreme People’s Procuratorate — Guidelines on Administrative Retrial Procuratorial Recommendations (2024) — illustrates cooperation between the procuratorates and courts in the supervision of administrative judgments.
   https://en.spp.gov.cn/2024-08/30/c_1018087.htm
9. Supreme People’s Court — Judicial Reform in China (2013–2022) — institutional account of judicial reform, judicial interpretations, court supervision and the organisation of adjudicative work.
   https://www.court.gov.cn/upload/file/2023/02/21/09/34/20230221093419_31617.pdf
10. Supreme People’s Procuratorate — 15th Five-Year Plan for the Development of People’s Procuratorial Work (2026) — outlines institutional priorities for criminal, civil, administrative and public-interest procuratorial functions.
    https://en.spp.gov.cn/2026-07/23/c_1201094.htm
11. Supreme People’s Procuratorate — Full-Process Case Management Guideline (2026) — describes the institutional framework for managing procuratorial cases from acceptance to conclusion and archiving.
    https://en.spp.gov.cn/2026-09/11/c_1218195.htm

Conclusion

The Supreme People’s Court and the people’s procuratorates are indispensable institutions within the Chinese legal system, but their constitutional responsibilities are fundamentally different. The Supreme People’s Court is the highest adjudicative organ, responsible for hearing cases within its jurisdiction, supervising lower courts and issuing judicial interpretations. The Supreme People’s Procuratorate is the highest procuratorial organ, responsible for public prosecution, legal supervision and other functions established by national legislation.

Their relationship illustrates the particular structure of Chinese criminal justice. Public security organs generally investigate criminal offences, procuratorates examine cases and decide whether prosecution should be initiated, and people’s courts determine criminal responsibility through adjudication. This division of functions is accompanied by coordination and legally defined supervisory mechanisms.

The Supreme People’s Court’s interpretative authority is equally important. Judicial interpretations clarify the application of national legislation and promote consistency across the country. They contribute significantly to the practical development of civil, commercial, criminal and administrative law, although they must remain within the framework of national legislation and cannot replace the legislative authority of the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee.

The procuratorates have an especially broad institutional role. Their responsibilities extend beyond criminal prosecution to supervision of specified civil and administrative proceedings, enforcement activities and public-interest litigation. The adoption of the Law on Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation on 6 November 2026 marks an important legislative development. From 1 January 2027, a dedicated statute will govern the scope, procedures and safeguards of this form of litigation, consolidating a system that has developed over more than a decade.

For individuals, companies and foreign organisations, these institutions matter because they influence the interpretation and enforcement of Chinese law, the conduct of criminal proceedings, the review of judicial decisions and the protection of legally recognised public interests. Their functions must be understood separately, but also in relation to the wider constitutional structure in which they operate.

The Supreme People’s Court and the people’s procuratorates therefore represent two complementary dimensions of the administration of justice in China: adjudication and legal supervision. Together, they form a central part of the institutional framework through which the state applies legislation, pursues criminal responsibility, oversees judicial legality and protects national and social public interests.

Editorial note: This article provides general legal and institutional information about the judicial and procuratorial systems of mainland China. Hong Kong and Macao maintain distinct legal and judicial arrangements under their respective Basic Laws. The article is educational and does not constitute legal advice.