In June 2026, the Supreme People’s Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate of China jointly issued a landmark Judicial Interpretation on Crimes Endangering Civil Aviation Flight Safety. This document clarifies criminal liability for acts threatening aviation security within Chinese jurisdiction, with significant implications for foreign defendants and international defense counsel.

Case Background

In late 2025, a foreign national was detained at a Chinese international airport after making bomb threats aboard a domestic flight segment. The defendant claimed drunkenness and lack of intent. This case exposed legal gray areas in cross-border aviation crime jurisdiction and directly contributed to the push for the new Interpretation.

Key Provisions

1. Expanded Criminal Conduct. The Interpretation explicitly covers: bomb hoaxes and false threats; interference with navigation facilities; assault or intimidation of crew; unauthorized cockpit access; and possession of prohibited items aboard aircraft.

2. Jurisdictional Framework. Chinese law applies to: acts on China-registered aircraft anywhere; acts on foreign aircraft within Chinese airspace; and acts targeting Chinese aviation infrastructure abroad if effects are felt in China. This aligns with the Tokyo Convention (1963) and Hague Convention (1970).

3. Penalty Structure. Three tiers: basic offenses (3-7 years), aggravated offenses with actual danger (7-10 years), and offenses causing death or serious loss (10 years to life).

Defense Strategies for Foreign Defendants

Jurisdictional Challenges. Under the Tokyo Convention, the state of aircraft registration has primary jurisdiction. For foreign-registered aircraft, counsel should examine whether China’s assertion of jurisdiction aligns with treaty obligations.

Mens Rea Arguments. The Interpretation requires “intentional” conduct. For foreign defendants, claims of misunderstanding Chinese law, lack of criminal intent, or cultural differences in threat perception may form viable defenses.

Evidentiary Scrutiny. Foreign-sourced evidence transmitted through MLA channels must satisfy Chinese standards. Defense counsel should scrutinize chain of custody and translation accuracy.

Procedural Rights. Foreign detainees have rights to: interpreter services at all stages; consular notification under the Vienna Convention; legal counsel from first interrogation; and communication with their embassy.

Contact

Wang Guan | Beijing Haolue Law Firm

Specializing in international criminal defense and cross-border litigation in China.

Disclaimer: For informational purposes only. Not legal advice.