International Criminal Police Academy

With the in-depth advancement of comprehensive law-based governance, administrative law enforcement, criminal law enforcement and police law enforcement have become increasingly standardized and legalized. However, excessive law enforcement remains a prominent practical problem in grassroots frontline law enforcement practice. Excessive law enforcement violates the principle of proportionality, due process and the concept of law enforcement for the people. It not only infringes upon the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations, but also undermines the credibility of law enforcement and intensifies social contradictions. Starting from the conceptual definition, common manifestations, causes and practical harms of excessive law enforcement, this paper systematically analyzes typical excessive law enforcement problems in law enforcement activities, and puts forward standardized governance countermeasures. It provides theoretical reference and practical solutions for improving the law enforcement restraint mechanism and promoting strict, standardized, impartial and civilized law enforcement. 1. Definition of Relevant Concepts 1.1 Connotation of Excessive Law Enforcement Excessive law enforcement refers that within statutory authority or beyond necessary limits, law enforcement subjects adopt compulsory measures, punishment means and control measures beyond factual needs, statutory scope and reasonable necessity. It violates the principles of proportionality and necessity, emphasizes punishment over education and control over service, resulting in obvious imbalance between law enforcement means and purposes. 1.2 Core Distinction Excessive law enforcement is different from illegal law enforcement. Illegal law enforcement means exercising no authority, exceeding authority or violating procedures; while excessive law enforcement has legal basis but adopts improper means, excessive punishment range and over-expanded measures, belonging to the irregular law enforcement of "legitimate but unreasonable, compliant but inappropriate". 2. Common Manifestations of Excessive Law Enforcement in Law Enforcement 2.1 Excessive Law Enforcement in Administrative Penalty 1. Maximum punishment and one-size-fits-all penaltyRegardless of the severity of circumstances, subjective fault degree and harm level, law enforcers impose maximum fines, qualification revocation and business rectification uniformly. A one-size-fits-all rectification is applied to small and micro merchants and minor violations, lacking discretionary space and flexible law enforcement. 2. Repeated punishment and multiple departmental punishmentThe same illegal act is repeatedly investigated and fined by multiple law enforcement departments, violating the principle of "no double jeopardy for one offense" and increasing the burden on the parties concerned. 3. Relying on fine instead of management, valuing punishment over educationIgnoring flexible methods such as education, persuasion and ordered rectification, law enforcers simply rely on fines, only pursuing law enforcement indicators and economic benefits while neglecting the root causes of violations. 2.2 Excessive Law Enforcement in Administrative Compulsory Measures 1. Arbitrary expansion of compulsory measuresFor minor illegal acts, compulsory means such as sealing up, seizure, freezing and business closure are adopted at will, with expanded sealing scope, over-limit seized articles and unreasonable closure period. 2. Excessive personal control measuresIn ordinary disputes and minor public security cases, arbitrary summons, long-term detention and compulsory removal are adopted, exceeding the necessary limit of maintaining on-site order and investigating evidence. 2.3 Excessive Law Enforcement in On-site Policing and Grassroots Governance 1. Lack of flexible management and abuse of rigid controlIn daily urban management, floating population management and venue inspection, law enforcement is simplistic and tough, lacking communication and persuasion, and resorting to warning, expulsion and compulsory rectification at every turn. 2. Layered over-amplification in special rectification campaignsIn various special campaigns, requirements are raised layer by layer. Grassroots authorities deliberately raise control standards and expand rectification scope to complete assessment indicators, resulting in excessive law enforcement caused by hierarchical pressure. 2.4 Excessive Law Enforcement in Procedure Application 1. Redundant procedures and artificially raised thresholdsAdditional certification materials, approval links and verification procedures beyond legal provisions are set up, artificially raising the threshold of handling affairs and rectification, and indirectly increasing obligations of the parties. 2. Rigid application of discretionary standardsThe right of free discretion is applied mechanically, without considering special individual circumstances and actual conditions of vulnerable groups, lacking humanized and differentiated law enforcement. 3. Main Causes of Excessive Law Enforcement 3.1 Deviated Law Enforcement Philosophy Some law enforcers adhere to the traditional thinking of valuing management over service, power over rights, and punishment over protection. They equate law enforcement with control and punishment with governance, lacking the legal concept of law enforcement for the people and prudent restraint. 3.2 Unreasonable Assessment Mechanism Performance evaluation overemphasizes quantitative indicators such as case quantity, fine amount and rectification number, while ignoring law enforcement quality, public satisfaction and conflict resolution effect. It forces grassroots authorities to enforce law strictly, severely and hastily to complete indicators. 3.3 Insufficient Restriction on Discretionary Power Legal provisions on the scope of punishment and application of compulsory measures are relatively broad. Free discretion standards are not refined or transparent, leaving operating space for excessive law enforcement; meanwhile, internal review and hierarchical supervision mechanisms are inadequate. 3.4 Uneven Professional Quality of Law Enforcers Some grassroots law enforcers lack professional legal ability and fail to fully understand the principles of proportionality, necessity and discretion. They also lack professional ethics, adopt simplistic and rude law enforcement methods, and are deficient in communication and flexible disposal capabilities. 3.5 Imperfect Supervision and Remedy Mechanisms Prior and ongoing supervision is weak, relying mostly on post-event accountability. Channels such as public complaint, administrative reconsideration and administrative litigation are insufficiently publicized with cumbersome procedures. Minor excessive law enforcement acts are mostly dealt with by oral reminder, lacking accountability deterrence. 3.6 Layered Transmission of Social Governance Pressure Grassroots authorities face heavy tasks in stability maintenance, safety rectification and industry supervision. Tasks are transmitted downward layer by layer. To avoid responsibilities and reduce risks, grassroots tend to adopt the principle of being stricter than lenient and over-cautious, forming a habitual over-amplified law enforcement mode. 4. Practical Harms of Excessive Law Enforcement 1. Infringement of legitimate rights and interests: Excessive fines, sealing and control directly violate citizens’ property rights, operating rights and personal freedom, especially harming small and micro merchants and ordinary people. 2. Damage to law enforcement credibility: Simplistic, rude and one-size-fits-all law enforcement easily causes public dissatisfaction, weakens public recognition and trust in law enforcement authorities, and undermines the authority of the rule of law. 3. Intensification of social contradictions: Excessive law enforcement triggers antagonistic emotions, leading to petition complaints, online public opinion conflicts and even on-site confrontations, increasing grassroots governance pressure. 4. Damage to the business environment: Maximum punishment and arbitrary closure of small and micro enterprises and individual industrial and commercial households inhibit market vitality and hinder the healthy development of private economy and real economy. 5. Violation of basic legal principles: It deviates from the rule of law requirements such as proportionality, rational administration and due process, hindering the construction of strict, standardized, impartial and civilized law enforcement. 5. Countermeasures to Govern Excessive Law Enforcement 5.1 Transform Law Enforcement Philosophy and Establish Prudent Law Enforcement Thinking Firmly establish the concepts of law enforcement for the people, education first, and punishment matching fault, adhere to the combination of punishment and education, control and service. Promote flexible law enforcement, reasoning-based law enforcement and humanized law enforcement, and put an end to simplistic, rude and one-size-fits-all governance. 5.2 Refine Discretion Standards and Narrow Space for Excessive Law Enforcement Formulate detailed free discretion benchmarks for administrative penalty and compulsory measures in various fields, classify punishment levels according to plot severity, harm degree and attitude of admitting mistakes, and clarify applicable circumstances for leniency, mitigation and exemption from punishment. Unify law enforcement standards to prevent arbitrary maximum punishment and man-made over-amplification. 5.3 Reform Assessment and Evaluation Mechanism and Reduce Utilitarian Indicators Optimize the performance appraisal system, reduce the weight of rigid indicators such as case quantity and fine amount, and increase quality indicators such as law enforcement standardization, public satisfaction, conflict resolution rate and zero public opinion incident. Eliminate the orientation of relying on fines for revenue and evaluating performance by quantity. 5.4 Strengthen Professional Construction of Law Enforcement Teams Carry out regular training on legal professional knowledge, law enforcement procedures, communication skills and professional ethics; strictly enforce access qualifications for law enforcers, establish regular rotation training and typical case warning education mechanisms, and improve capabilities of law enforcement in accordance with the law, reasonable discretion and flexible disposal. 5.5 Improve the Whole-process Supervision and Restraint System 1. Prior supervision: Publicize law enforcement procedures and discretion standards to make law enforcement basis and scale transparent. 2. Ongoing supervision: Implement the whole-process law enforcement recording system with video and written records; implement hierarchical review for major punishment and compulsory measures. 3. Post-supervision: Strengthen disciplinary inspection, legal review, public supervision and media supervision; publicly notify and seriously hold accountable typical excessive law enforcement acts. 5.6 Implement Inclusive and Prudent Supervision and Apply Minor Exemption List Fully implement the system of non-penalty list for minor violations, first violation without penalty and minor exemption from punishment. For first-time, minor violations corrected timely without harmful consequences, adopt education, persuasion and ordered rectification instead of punishment, reducing excessive punishment from the source. 5.7 Smooth Channels for Right Remedy Simplify the procedures of administrative reconsideration, administrative litigation and complaint reporting, expand online and offline reporting channels; establish a rapid verification, feedback and error correction mechanism for excessive law enforcement, correct irregular law enforcement acts in accordance with the law, and protect the legitimate remedy rights of parties concerned. 6. Conclusion Excessive law enforcement is a prominent problem urgently to be rectified in current law enforcement practice, rooted in deviated law enforcement philosophy, alienated assessment mechanism, insufficient discretion constraints and imperfect supervision system. Governing excessive law enforcement relies not only on post-event accountability, but also on coordinated efforts in philosophy reshaping, system improvement, standard refinement, assessment optimization, team upgrading and whole-process supervision. Adhering to the principles of legality, rationality, necessity and balance, we should promote the transformation of law enforcement from "emphasizing control and punishment" to "emphasizing standardization, service and conflict resolution", realize strict, standardized, impartial and civilized law enforcement, and maintain social fairness, justice and harmonious stability of grassroots governance.