Criminal Liability For False Testimony In Chinese Courts

01 Nov 2025 --
0 Comments

Criminal Liability for False Testimony in China

In China, the Criminal Law (Articles 305–307) provides for criminal liability in cases of false testimony or inducing others to provide false testimony during judicial proceedings. These laws are designed to protect the integrity of the judicial system.

Article 305: Witnesses giving false testimony can be criminally liable.

Article 306: Lawyers, defenders, or agents who fabricate evidence, induce witnesses to lie, or obstruct justice can be liable.

Article 307: Other persons who induce witnesses to give false testimony or destroy evidence can be liable.

Key elements for criminal liability:

Intentional act.

False statement concerning material facts of the case.

Action has relevance to the outcome of the trial or investigation.

Case Summaries

Case 1: Witness Gives False Testimony

Facts: In a theft case, a witness claimed to have seen the defendant steal money from a store. Later, the witness admitted he had not actually seen the act and provided false information.
Outcome: The witness was convicted under Article 305 for intentionally providing false testimony. He received a six-month prison sentence.
Significance: Shows that even ordinary witnesses can face criminal liability for false testimony.

Case 2: Lawyer Encourages False Testimony (Li Zhuang Case)

Facts: A defense lawyer instructed his client to claim police coercion and fabricated evidence to influence the case. He also persuaded witnesses to give false statements.
Outcome: Convicted under Article 306, the lawyer was sentenced to 2½ years in prison.
Significance: Highlights that legal professionals can face criminal liability if they induce or fabricate false testimony.

Case 3: Suborned Witness in Embezzlement Case

Facts: A lawyer persuaded a key witness to falsely claim that money transferred to a business partner was a legitimate loan, not embezzlement.
Outcome: Charges against the lawyer were dropped due to insufficient evidence.
Significance: Demonstrates the difficulty of proving inducement of false testimony in court.

Case 4: False Testimony in Civil Litigation

Facts: In a civil fraud case, a party and their lawyer submitted fabricated contracts and witness statements to claim damages.
Outcome: Both the party and the lawyer were sentenced for false litigation and evidence fabrication. The lawyer received two years’ imprisonment and a fine.
Significance: Shows that false testimony in civil cases can also attract criminal liability when it involves fabrication of evidence.

Case 5: Witness Recants Testimony in Assault Case

Facts: During an assault trial, a witness initially testified that the defendant attacked the victim. Later, the witness admitted under cross-examination that the initial testimony was false.
Outcome: Convicted under Article 305, the witness received a suspended sentence due to cooperation and confession.
Significance: Demonstrates the mitigating factor of voluntary confession in false testimony cases.

Case 6: Submission of Forged Documents

Facts: A lawyer submitted forged documents as evidence to support his client’s claim in a property dispute.
Outcome: Convicted under Article 306 for fabricating evidence and obstructing justice, receiving 18 months’ imprisonment.
Significance: Expands the concept of “false testimony” to include submission of false documents by legal representatives.

Case 7: Inducing False Testimony by a Third Party

Facts: An acquaintance of a defendant bribed a witness to testify in the defendant’s favor, falsely claiming he saw nothing during a robbery.
Outcome: Convicted under Article 307 for inducing false testimony; received one year of imprisonment.
Significance: Highlights criminal liability of third parties in influencing witnesses.