On September 3, 2020, the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate and the Ministry of Public Security jointly issued the Guiding Opinions on the Application of the Justifiable Defense System in Accordance with Law, which release key information about justifiable defense, rectify the erroneous tendency in judicial practice of favoring whoever is dead or wounded, and clearly define the abuse of defense right.

On September 4, 2020, Professor Liu Renwen, the head of the Criminal Law Department of CASS Law Institute, was interviewed by China National Radio on the significance of the new regulations on justifiable defense. In the interview, Professor Liu pointed out that, in the past, the law was too conservative in the determination of justifiable defense, resulting in the non-recognition of justifiable dense which should be recognized in many cases. The purpose of the Guiding Opinions is to encourage the people to exercise their right of justifiable defense in accordance with law and use the legal weapon to fight against crimes. The recognition of the right to justifiable dense does not mean encouraging the abuse of the right to defense. The Guiding Opinions contain clear provisions on the definition of justifiable defense. The difficult in judicial practice lays in the determination of the time of defense. Namely, justifiable defense must be directed to unlawful infringement that has already begun and not yet completed. The Guiding Opinions also clearly provide that justifiable defense must be based on justifiable intention of defense. Article 8 of the Guiding Opinions provides that the purpose of justifiable defense should be to protect the state and public interest or the personal, property and other rights of the defender or another person from unlawful infringement. Acts of defense provocation, namely intentionally provoking the other party to carry out the attack and then fight back against him, shall not be recognized as justifiable defense. Although the Guiding Opinions cannot make clear provisions on all possible situations, they have successfully maintained a good balance between upholding the right of justifiable defenders and preventing the abuse of the right of defense.