Blog
![[Branch News] The Communist Youth League Branch and the Women’s Federation of Zhongji Dali Branch Have Been Established.](/npublic/img/s.png "[Branch News] The Communist Youth League Branch and the Women’s Federation of Zhongji Dali Branch Have Been Established.")
On September 16, 2025, the founding general meeting of the Communist Youth League branch and the Women's Federation of Yunnan Zhongji (Dali) Law Firm was held with great solemnity. This meeting marks an important step forward for the firm in strengthening Party building to lead Youth League development and in promoting the protection of women’s rights and interests.
Some time ago, a trial was held involving multiple defendants accused of organized crime and evil forces. One of the defendants was also charged with official misconduct. The defendant’s defense counsel argued that the defendant’s statements had been obtained through violent threats and thus requested that the court obtain the simultaneous audio-video recordings to exclude any illegally obtained evidence. Eventually, the court agreed and instructed the supervisory authority to provide the recordings. However, the court stipulated that only the judges and prosecutors could review these recordings—not the defense counsel. Naturally, the defense counsel strongly insisted on being allowed to view the recordings, even becoming quite confrontational at times. Yet the court remained firm in its refusal, citing it as judicial practice. In the end, the defense counsel never got to see the recordings. In fact, this incident highlights a fundamental issue: neither side could find any legal basis for whether the defense counsel should be permitted to review the simultaneous recordings. The defense counsel couldn’t point to any legal provision authorizing such access, while the court itself couldn’t produce any clear legal rationale for either permitting or denying the defense counsel’s request—leaving them with nothing but the claim that it was simply “judicial practice.”
[Zhongji News] Attorney Li Wenhua from our firm has been invited to deliver a lecture for Yunnan Power Grid Co., Ltd.
Domestic violence is not a domestic matter: Examining how the law protects victims through two heinous cases.
“Elegant bribery” is not uncommon in cases of official misconduct, and some of the news reports that have appeared in the media are truly eye-opening. In practice, elegant bribery exhibits several distinctive features: First, certain criminal methods are indeed highly concealed—or might even be described as “sophisticated”—making them extremely difficult to detect and prosecute. Second, legally speaking, elegant bribery involves issues such as errors in perception, the consistency between subjective intent and objective actions, and the distinction between completed and attempted crimes. Moreover, at times it can be exceedingly challenging to differentiate between genuine and fake items, rendering these cases particularly complex and perplexing. Third, given the unique trading norms and industry traditions that have evolved over thousands of years around calligraphy, paintings, antiques, and other such artifacts, simply applying criminal law to certain situations could inadvertently disrupt this time-honored sector. Consequently, it is not easy to draw a clear line between cracking down on such behavior and safeguarding the integrity of the relevant industries. This article seeks to analyze and explore the issues surrounding elegant bribery.
In the field of construction projects, it is quite common for enterprises, driven by their own interests, to lend their qualification certificates to other entities for use. However, the practice of an actual contractor without proper qualifications borrowing the name of a qualified construction company to undertake projects is explicitly prohibited by laws and regulations—it constitutes an illegal “nominal subcontracting” arrangement. In practice, although the entity being sub-contracted often employs various measures to actively evade legal risks, it frequently finds itself embroiled in numerous lawsuits due to the inherent illegality of the nominal subcontracting arrangement itself, as well as the lack of clear definitions for what constitutes such an arrangement, its diverse forms, unclear standards for rights and obligations, and significant disagreements over liability allocation. As a result, the entity being sub-contracted faces substantial legal risks. Therefore, this article, from the perspective of the entity being sub-contracted, combines selected judicial viewpoints to provide a brief analysis of the risks and liabilities it confronts.
Our firm is divided into several business departments based on their respective areas of practice, including: Criminal Law Department, Civil Law Department, Administrative Law Department, Financial and Securities Department, Construction and Real Estate Department, Intellectual Property Department, and Labor and Healthcare Department.
Column Menu
Contact Information
China Office Address: No. 730 Renmin West Road, Wuhua District, Kunming City, Zhongji Building (Exit D, Mianshan Metro Station)
Phone:0871-63641358 0871-63640463
U.S. Irvine Address: 930 Roosevelt Suite 215, Irvine, CA, 92620
Contact phone number:(+1) 949-701-8756
Email:zhangqian@zhongjilaw.com
Arcadia, USA Address: 411 E Huntington Dr., Ste 206, Arcadia, CA 91006
Contact phone number:(+1) 626-838-6868
Follow us