On Friday, China’s Supreme People’s Court, the nation’s highest judicial body, unveiled eight “guiding cases” on domestic violence, placing particular emphasis on psychological domestic abuse as a legally actionable offense. Guiding cases are commonly issued by the court to set new judicial precedents across China, a concept similar to test cases abroad.

These cases serve to emphasize that patterns of humiliation and threats of self-harm by spouses constitute domestic violence under Chinese law, and that violent discipline of children is legally recognized as abuse. 

China enacted its first Anti-Domestic Violence Law on March 1, 2016, clearly defining domestic violence — or “family violence,” as it’s known in Chinese — as physical or psychological harm inflicted upon spouses and children through acts ranging from physical violence to frequent verbal abuse and intimidation.

Prosecutorial data from November 2024 indicates that battery and homicide account for roughly 80% of criminal offenses related to domestic violence. While its most recent release shows that domestic violence cases are declining, significant challenges persist in terms of evidence collection, compounded by a tendency by courts to dismiss crimes of domestic violence as mere “family disputes.”

Through its newly released guiding cases, the court is addressing some of these challenges.

Two of the eight cases exclusively involve psychological abuse, with the remaining six involving physical violence. The cases span abuse directed at spouses and romantic partners to children.

The first psychological domestic abuse case detailed how a defendant was convicted for subjecting his girlfriend to prolonged verbal abuse, driving her to suicide. In the second case, a man received a restraining order and a fine after threatening to harm himself with a kitchen knife during an argument with his wife. These rulings establish that Chinese courts will now consider repeated instances of psychological harm as evidence of domestic abuse.

Among the cases of physical violence toward family members, two highlighted judgments relating to the rape of a minor. 

In one case, a man was sentenced to 15 years in prison for the rape and molestation of his 12-year-old stepdaughter, despite her having retracted her statement. The court ruled that the victim’s retraction stemmed from pressure from her mother, setting a legal precedent for courts to consider coercion, in combination with other evidence, when assessing the validity of victims’ statements.

In the second case, a man received a four-year prison sentence for raping his stepdaughter despite her lack of physical resistance — something that has previously posed challenges in proving rape cases in China — establishing that the absence of resistance doesn’t imply consent.

The court further set the legal precedent that violent discipline of children constitutes domestic violence, particularly when compounded with psychological harm. In one case, a child was shown to have developed physical injuries and severe depression as a result of beatings.

The eight guiding cases do not simply highlight legal precedents in judgment but also affirm victims’ rights to compensation for damages. In one case, the court granted a divorce to a woman who worked as a full-time housewife based on evidence of domestic violence, as well as ordered her ex-husband to pay her 100,000 yuan ($14,000) for household labor and 50,000 yuan in damages.

Zhang Ying, a Beijing-based lawyer with Hylands Law Firm, noted that the guiding cases released by the Supreme People’s Court represent progress in addressing domestic violence. However, she highlighted that numerous issues, such as dismissal of divorce petitions in cases of domestic violence when a defendant opposes the divorce, require further attention in judicial practice.

“In judicial practice, it is not uncommon to see a noticeable disconnect between lower court case adjudication and legal provisions. Only by consistently promoting the citation of the supreme court’s typical cases and legal reasoning in judicial practice can we genuinely advance anti-domestic violence efforts across society and the judicial system,” Zhang stated.

Editor: Marianne Gunnarsson.

(Header image: DrAfter123/Getty Creative/VCG)