Menu ▾
Start sealing, $349/mo Live demos For attorneys Standing orders Sanctions record Verify free Enterprise Pick what it does Why now Pick the problem Start where you stand The Drift Desk What is a standing order Sanctioned for AI citations Privilege and AI Detectors compared Authorship marks compared When the law changes The 124 laws The products Pricing The Regulayer Receipt HumanMark The free Sealer For insurers Support Open verifier About FAQ Legal

AI rules for lawyers, by country · China · Asia Pacific

China: judicial AI policy, and disclosure at the Xiamen Maritime Court

Supreme People’s Court, Opinions on Regulating and Strengthening the Applications of Artificial Intelligence in the Judicial Fields, 9 December 2022 · Xiamen Maritime Court, Guidelines for Litigation Participants’ Use of Artificial Intelligence (trial), 2025

Page verified 5 August 2026. We could not open the Opinions and Guidelines from this session, so everything below is recorded from contemporaneous reporting and official statements rather than quoted from the document. We say so rather than imply we read it.

China has the earliest national judicial AI policy on this record, from December 2022, and it is framed the opposite way from everyone else’s: not as a risk to be contained but as a capability to be built, with deadlines. The restrictions on litigants came later, and separately.

The Supreme People’s Court Opinions, 2022

  • Issued9 December 2022, well before almost every other instrument on this site.
  • AimDeep integration of AI with judicial work, deepening the construction of “smart courts”, and a higher level of digital justice.
  • DeadlinesAll courts to implement improved AI functional systems by 2025, reaching full application effectiveness by 2030.
  • Supported usesEvidence guidance and review; retrieval of laws, regulations and similar cases; adjudication assistance; AI-assisted generation and review of legal documents. The stated purpose is uniformity of adjudication.

Xiamen Maritime Court: disclosure, and a prohibition

In 2025 the Xiamen Maritime Court ruled on a lawyer’s use of AI in civil proceedings, requiring full disclosure, and subsequently issued Guidelines for Litigation Participants’ Use of Artificial Intelligence on a trial basis.

  • PermittedLitigants are generally permitted to use AI.
  • ProhibitedUsing AI to generate, fabricate, alter or tamper with evidence, or to distort factual circumstances.
  • RequiredFull disclosure of AI use.

The evidence prohibition is the same rule Qatar wrote at paragraph 18 of its practice direction in January 2026, and it is stricter than anything currently in force in the United States, where proposed Federal Rule of Evidence 707 remains proposed.

Read it beside the labelling measures

China now has both halves of a provenance regime. The Measures for Labelling of AI-Generated Synthetic Content, in force since 1 September 2025, require explicit visible labels and implicit machine-readable metadata carrying the provider name and a content reference number. The court instruments require disclosure and prohibit AI-generated evidence.

One regime marks the file. The other governs what may be done with it in a courtroom. No other jurisdiction has both.

What to do about it

Seven days free, then $349 a month. Or run it across the estate.

Disclosure in full, and a prohibition on AI-generated evidence, are both answered the same way: a record of what the tool produced and which human stood behind it, made at the time. The same engine either way: a signed record made on your own machine, content-free, and checkable free by anyone, forever.

Start the free weekOr Regulayer for enterprise →

See also the attorney certification, the free verifier, and every jurisdiction we track.

Sources

  • Supreme People’s Court Opinions (2022), China Justice Observer
  • Xiamen Maritime Court, Guidelines for Litigation Participants’ Use of Artificial Intelligence (trial), 2025.
  • Neither document opened from this session. Recorded from China Justice Observer, Akin and Reed Smith analysis. We have worked from translations, carry no quotation, and cite no article numbers.

Related

Checked 5 August 2026. Not read at source; worked from translations and analysis. Information, not legal advice, and not advice on the law of the People’s Republic of China.

Common questions

Does China regulate AI in its courts?

Yes, and earlier than most. On 9 December 2022 the Supreme People's Court issued Opinions on Regulating and Strengthening the Applications of Artificial Intelligence in the Judicial Fields, setting a programme for all courts to implement improved AI functional systems by 2025 and to reach full application effectiveness by 2030.

Do Chinese courts require lawyers to disclose AI use?

At least one does. In 2025 the Xiamen Maritime Court issued Guidelines for Litigation Participants' Use of Artificial Intelligence, on a trial basis, requiring full disclosure of AI use. Litigants are generally permitted to use AI, but using it to generate, fabricate, alter or tamper with evidence, or to distort factual circumstances, is strictly prohibited.

What does China's Supreme People's Court permit AI to be used for?

The Opinions support AI applications in evidence guidance and review, smart retrieval of laws, regulations and similar cases, adjudication assistance, and AI-assisted generation and review of legal documents, with the stated aim of advancing consistency of adjudication.

Is China's approach to AI in courts different from the West's?

In one respect substantially. Most Western instruments regulate AI as a risk to be contained. China's Opinions are framed as a programme of adoption with deadlines, directing courts to build AI capability, while separately prohibiting the uses that would corrupt evidence or fact-finding.

Information, not legal advice, and not advice on the law of any jurisdiction. Every entry is verified against the issuing body’s own document; where a source is reporting rather than the document, we say so.