China’s newly revised law includes records of drug use and solicitation in the scope of records to be sealed, sparking public doubts as to whether the new law is a green light for certain groups. China Central Television (CCTV) responded that sealing records does not mean they are completely erased, and sealing records does not mean protecting certain groups, but rather equal protection for everyone.
China’s newly revised “Public Security Administration Punishment Law” includes records of offenses such as drug use and solicitation under the scope of record sealing. The original intention is to give those with minor criminal records a chance to rehabilitate, but it has triggered netizens’ suspicions about whether it is a whitewash of privilege.
CCTV News published a report on Sunday interpreting that sealed records of administrative violations apply to “acts that do not yet constitute criminal punishment”, such as drug use, assault, gambling, etc., with the core being “restricting publicity and routine inquiries”. The records themselves remain fully stored in police systems and are not completely deleted.
In response to public concerns that “neighbor’s sealed drug use records may infringe on my right to safety”, the report says that China has always implemented “dynamic control” over drug users, and public security agencies will make regular return visits and carry out testing for people undergoing rehabilitation.
In response to public concerns that “neighbor’s sealed drug use records may infringe on my right to safety”, the report says that China has always implemented “dynamic control” over drug users, and public security agencies will make regular return visits and carry out testing for people undergoing rehabilitation.
The report also quotes legal experts as saying that sealing records does not mean “risk is hidden”. Regarding the public’s concern that “drug users may engage in high-risk occupations”, there are currently multiple legal safeguards, and sealing records will not weaken occupational entry regulation. Key positions such as ride-hailing drivers, kindergarten teachers, and security guards still have entry requirements for “no drug use record”, and recruiters can still check past records.
In response to ongoing worries that the police “will no longer announce drug-related cases involving celebrities”, leading to “concealment of drug-related acts” and weakening the deterrent effect, the report cites experts as saying that sealing records does not mean protecting certain groups, but rather equal protection for all.
The report emphasizes that setting up a sealing system for public order violation records is necessary because there are over 8 million people who have been subject to administrative penalties, and they need “to get rid of lifelong labeling”. Professor Bao Han from the Criminal Investigation College of People's Public Security University of China said that this legislation addresses the traditional belief and predicament of “one violation, lifelong restriction”.
In response to ongoing worries that the police “will no longer announce drug-related cases involving celebrities”, leading to “concealment of drug-related acts” and weakening the deterrent effect, the report cites experts as saying that sealing records does not mean protecting certain groups, but rather equal protection for all.
The report emphasizes that setting up a sealing system for public order violation records is necessary because there are over 8 million people who have been subject to administrative penalties, and they need “to get rid of lifelong labeling”. Professor Bao Han from the Criminal Investigation College of People's Public Security University of China said that this legislation addresses the traditional belief and predicament of “one violation, lifelong restriction”.
China’s newly revised “Public Security Administration Punishment Law” will take effect next year. Article 136 clearly states: “Records of violations of public order management should be sealed and must not be provided to or made public to any unit or individual, except when relevant state organs need them for handling cases or relevant units inquire according to state regulations. Units that inquire in accordance with the law must keep sealed records confidential.”