From Dependency to Independence: On the Paradigm Transformation of Criminal Protection of Privacy Rights in China

Main Article Content

Mengfan Zhang

Keywords

big data, right to privacy, right to personal information, dual-track system, crime of violating the personal information of the citizens

Abstract

The extensive application of big data and artificial intelligence technologies has led to the ongoing erosion of privacy protection; however, the safeguards for the right to privacy under China’s Criminal Law have clearly lagged behind. Judicial practice has relied on the crime of infringing upon citizens’ personal information as the primary regulatory tool; however, privacy rights and personal information rights differ fundamentally in the legal interests they protect: the former protects personal dignity and the peace of one’s life, while the latter upholds the order of information flow and self-determination. As evidenced by Guiding Case No. 265 of the Supreme People’s Court and a number of representative cases of cyber violence, a considerable amount of conduct that directly undermines the dignity of privacy can only be prosecuted through the legal framework of personal information crimes, which creates a displacement in the evaluation of the protected legal interests. Meanwhile, the Civil Code has explicitly established the right to privacy as an independent and prioritized specific personality right, yet criminal legislation has consistently failed to establish dedicated provisions, leading to structural contradictions within the legal system. Through an analysis of legal interests and normative frameworks, this paper identifies three limitations in the current dependent protection model—regarding the evaluation of legal interests, the scope of protection, and constitutionality—and proposes the establishment of a “crime of infringement of citizens’ right to privacy” to construct a dual-track paradigm combining direct and indirect protection. This transformation is not merely the addition of a new criminal offense but also a profound adjustment to the definition of legal interests, evaluation mechanisms, and systemic coordination, with the aim of providing comprehensive and effective criminal law safeguards for the right to privacy in the digital age.

Abstract 25 | PDF Downloads 30

References

  • [1] Criminal Judgment of the People’s Court of Gusu District, Suzhou City, Jiangsu Province (2020) Su 0508 Criminal No. 714.
  • [2] Criminal Judgment of the Intermediate People’s Court of Anshun City, Guizhou Province (2020) Qian 04 Criminal Appeal No. 155.
  • [3] Wei Chen, Yucen Wu. (2024). The Reconstruction of Criminal Law Protection Mode of Privacy in the Big Data Age. Journal of Southwest University of Political Science & Law, 26 (1), 107-121+162.
  • [4] Article 1034 of the Civil Code, https://xcx2019.faxin.cn/m/v5/web/twsy/TwsyContent.aspx?isapp=1&gid=A290592&twsygid=47878&tiao=1034.
  • [5] Article 3 of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Public Security Administration Punishments.
  • [6] Liming Wang. (2013). Legal Protection of Personal Information: Centered on the Line between Personal Information and Privacy. Modern Law Science, 35 (4),62-72.
  • [7] Xianquan Liu. (2025). The Criminal Law Protection of Citizens’ Privacy Rights in the Era of Artificial Intelligence. The Jurist, (5), 15-26+190-191.
  • [8] Yongqiang Ma. (2021). On the Confirmation of the Legal Interest Attribute of the Crime of Infringing upon Citizens’ Personal Information. Global Law Review, 43 (2), 102-118.
  • [9] Guangquan Zhou. (2021). On the Object of the Act in the Crime of Infringing upon Citizens’ Personal Information. Tsinghua University Law Journal, 15 (3), 25-40.
  • [10] Xinjiu Qu. (2015). On the Supra-individual Legal Interest Attribute of the Crime of Infringing upon Citizens’ Personal Information. People’s Procuratorial Semimonthly, (11), 5-9.
  • [11] Chuankai Guo. (2024). Reflection and Reconstruction of Sensitive Personal Information Processing Rules. Tribune of Political Science and Law, 42 (3), 102-113.
  • [12] Zheng Chen. (2021). On the Principle of Prohibition of Under-protection in the Constitution: A Comparative Study with the Principle of Proportionality. Chinese Journal of Law, 43 (4), 55-72.
  • [13] Article 38 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China.
  • [14] Article 40 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China.
  • [15] German Civil Code, Division 15, Violation of the privacy of personal and private sphere, German Criminal Code, https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html#p1939.
  • [16] Benqi Ouyang. (2021). Redefining the Legal Interests in Criminalization of the Infringement of Citizens’ Personal Information: A Shift from Private Law Rights to Public Law Rights. Journal of Comparative Law, (3), 55-68.
  • [17] Article 50(6) of the Public Security Administration Punishment Law.
  • [18] Tong Zhao. (2024). Layered criminal law protection of personal information in the dual structure of legal interests. Journal of Southeast University (Philosophy and Social Science), 26 (4), 87-97+151.
  • [19] Bo Xiong. (2023). Criminal Protection of Data Classification and Grading. Tribune of Political Science and Law, 41 (3), 155-167.
  • [20] Xiaohong Guo. (2025). Criminal Law Characterization of Medical Data Breach: Disputes and Solutions. Law Science, (10), 98-113.