Criminalization Of Surrogate Test-Taking In Exams
1. Meaning and Legal Basis
(A) Definition
Surrogate test-taking refers to the act where someone other than the registered examinee takes an exam on their behalf. This is often seen in:
National entrance exams (e.g., Gaokao)
Professional licensing exams
Civil service examinations
(B) Legal Basis in PRC
Criminal Law of the PRC
Article 284: Fraud in examinations or falsification of academic credentials.
Article 358 (Amendments): Addresses criminal organization of cheating in professional exams.
Penalties: Can range from fines to imprisonment depending on severity.
Regulations on National Examinations
Examination Cheating Regulations (issued by MOE or provincial authorities) criminalize:
Impersonation
Using technology to cheat
Organizing surrogate test-taking
Civil/Administrative Sanctions
Disqualification from exams
Revocation of degrees or licenses
Fines for institutions assisting surrogate test-taking
Key Principle:
Surrogate test-taking is both a fraudulent act and a criminal offense in PRC law.
2. Illustrative Case Law and Examples
CASE 1: Beijing – Surrogate for Gaokao Exam (2015)
Facts:
A student paid a professional surrogate to take the National College Entrance Exam (Gaokao).
The surrogate was caught by facial recognition technology at the exam center.
Legal Action:
Prosecuted under Article 284 of the Criminal Law (fraudulent behavior in examinations).
Court Findings:
Both the surrogate and the student colluded intentionally.
The act constituted fraud in a national exam.
Penalty:
Surrogate: 3 years imprisonment
Student: 2 years imprisonment, suspended for 3 years
Key Takeaway:
National exams are strictly monitored; surrogate test-taking is criminalized with heavy penalties.
CASE 2: Guangdong – Professional Licensing Exam (2017)
Facts:
A law graduate hired someone to take the bar exam on their behalf.
The exam center detected discrepancies in handwriting and ID verification.
Legal Action:
Charges: Organizing and participating in exam fraud.
Prosecuted under Criminal Law Articles 284 & 358.
Court Findings:
The surrogate’s professional experience allowed easy impersonation.
The graduate sought an unfair advantage intentionally.
Penalty:
Graduate: 1.5 years imprisonment, suspended for 2 years
Surrogate: 2 years imprisonment
Key Takeaway:
Professional licensing exams are treated as sensitive national matters. Criminal liability applies to both the surrogate and the candidate.
CASE 3: Shanghai – Civil Service Examination (2018)
Facts:
Several candidates hired a cheating ring to take the Shanghai civil service exam on their behalf.
The scheme involved ID fraud and bribing exam officials.
Legal Action:
Prosecuted under Article 284 (exam fraud) and Article 389 (bribery of public officials).
Court Findings:
The act was an organized criminal activity.
Collusion with officials aggravated the offense.
Penalty:
Main organizer: 5 years imprisonment
Candidates: 2–3 years imprisonment, plus disqualification from exams for 5 years
Complicit officials: Administrative dismissal and criminal charges
Key Takeaway:
Organizing surrogate test-taking for civil service exams is treated as serious criminal fraud, especially with bribery involvement.
CASE 4: Hunan – University Entrance Exam (Gaokao) (2019)
Facts:
Student from rural Hunan hired a local resident to sit for Gaokao.
A suspicious pattern of absenteeism and exam seating checks led to detection.
Legal Action:
Prosecuted under Article 284 (fraud).
Court Findings:
Intentional deception in national exam confirmed.
Penalty:
Surrogate: 2 years imprisonment, suspended for 3 years
Student: 1 year administrative detention, plus exam results canceled
Key Takeaway:
Even rural students attempting surrogate test-taking face criminal and administrative consequences.
CASE 5: Zhejiang – Online Exam Surrogate Scheme (2020)
Facts:
Candidates hired a remote test-taking service using webcams and VPNs to impersonate them in online professional exams.
Legal Action:
Charges: Fraudulent test-taking (Article 284) and illegal use of technology to commit fraud.
Court Findings:
Remote surrogacy constitutes cheating equivalent to physical impersonation.
Organized for-profit scheme increased severity.
Penalty:
Organizers: 4 years imprisonment
Individual candidates: 1–2 years imprisonment, suspended for 2 years
Key Takeaway:
Technology-assisted surrogate test-taking is criminalized under the same principles as in-person impersonation.
CASE 6: Chongqing – Graduate Entrance Exam (2021)
Facts:
A candidate hired a graduate with similar academic background to take the postgraduate entrance exam.
Surveillance cameras identified differences in height and appearance.
Legal Action:
Prosecuted for fraudulent test-taking under Article 284.
Court Findings:
Both parties had clear intent to deceive.
Organized surrogacy aggravated the crime.
Penalty:
Candidate: 18 months imprisonment, suspended for 2 years
Surrogate: 2 years imprisonment
Key Takeaway:
Criminal liability applies to both sides of surrogate exam-taking in academic tests.
CASE 7: Fujian – Foreign Language Proficiency Exam (2022)
Facts:
A candidate employed a professional speaker to take a national language proficiency test.
Detection occurred via biometric ID checks and voice verification.
Legal Action:
Charges under Article 284 (exam fraud).
Court Findings:
Fraud confirmed; intentional deception for certification.
Penalty:
Candidate: 1.5 years imprisonment, suspended
Surrogate: 2 years imprisonment
Certification revoked
Key Takeaway:
Any form of surrogate test-taking in nationally recognized exams is criminally punishable, regardless of test type.
3. Patterns Across Cases
Both candidate and surrogate are criminally liable.
Penalties range: imprisonment (1–5 years), suspended sentences, fines, disqualification from exams.
Aggravating factors:
Organized fraud
Bribery of officials
Use of technology for impersonation
National or professional significance of exam
Detection methods:
Facial recognition
Biometric verification
Surveillance cameras
Behavioral monitoring
Civil/administrative consequences:
Revocation of degrees or licenses
Disqualification from exams
Professional bans
4. Key Takeaways
Surrogate test-taking is considered fraud and a serious offense in PRC law.
Criminal liability exists even for first-time offenders if deception affects exam integrity.
PRC authorities employ advanced technological and legal measures to detect and prosecute surrogate test-taking.
Organized or profit-driven surrogate schemes face heavier penalties than isolated cases.
RELATED Blog
comments