The newly revised Law of the People's Republic of China on Public Security Administration Punishments will officially come into effect on January 1, 2026. From incorporating harmful behaviors such as high-altitude littering and drone "black flying" into the scope of regulation, to further regulating social hot issues such as animal injury and noise disturbance; From improving regulations related to minors to clarifying the legality of legitimate defense, the newly revised laws timely respond to the needs of the times, effectively carrying the people's earnest expectations, and building a new legal guarantee for social security governance. The implementation of the new law is imminent, and Guangming Network conducted a special interview with Associate Professor Fang Baoguo from the Law School of China University of Political Science and Law to provide a detailed interpretation of the highlights and significance of the revised law for the public. Fang Baoguo believes that this revision has built a more refined, forward-looking, and proportionate legal framework for public security management by filling in rule gaps, optimizing punishment gradients, and strengthening procedural constraints. It provides a solid basis for public security organs to maintain social order and safeguard citizens' rights in the new situation. The full text of the interview is as follows: Facing emerging challenges, high-altitude throwing is subject to "behavior is punished". Reporter: The current Public Security Administration Punishment Law has been implemented since March 1, 2006. In the past 19 years, China's economic and social development has undergone significant changes, and new situations and problems have emerged in the field of social security management. What aspects have been mainly modified in this amendment to address new situations and issues in public security management? Please interpret the highlights. In addition, according to the newly revised content, which new illegal behaviors will be included in the scope of public security management penalties? Fang Baoguo: The revision of the Public Security Administration Punishment Law this time is a systematic response to the new security risks caused by the changes in social structure and technological progress over the past 20 years. The core lies in weaving a dense legal network, optimizing procedures, balancing punishment and education, marking the modernization and advancement of China's social security governance system. Revise to face emerging challenges and include a group of behaviors with universal harm but long-term lack of regulation in the scope of punishment. In the field of public safety, high-altitude throwing is subject to "behavior is punished", and as long as there is a danger to public safety, accountability can be pursued without waiting for actual damage to occur; The "black flying" of drones is clearly listed as a violation of public safety, and clear detention and punishment standards are set. In terms of protecting personal rights, the abuse of children, elderly, sick and disabled persons under guardianship and care, infringement of citizens' personal information, and interference with others' normal lives through harassment, entanglement and other means are all clearly defined as illegal. In addition, behaviors that harm the public interest, such as cheating in exams, organizing and leading pyramid schemes, and infringing on the reputation and honor of heroes and martyrs, have also been added as punishment targets, strengthening the maintenance of public order and good customs. At the same time, establish a lenient system for admitting and punishing mistakes, encourage parties to actively admit and punish mistakes, and improve law enforcement efficiency. In terms of the protection of minors, the conditions for the application of administrative detention have been revised and adjusted. For illegal acts committed by minors who have not reached the age of criminal responsibility but have serious circumstances and have a negative impact, it is stipulated that detention can be carried out to avoid being released at once; And connect with the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency to clarify corrective education measures. In addition, establishing a system for sealing records of public security violations, expanding the scope of hearing procedures, and demonstrating the deep protection of the rights and interests of parties, especially minors. Overall, this revision has built a more refined, forward-looking, and proportionate legal framework for public security management by filling in rule gaps, pre governance ports, optimizing penalty gradients, and strengthening procedural constraints. It provides a solid basis for public security organs to maintain social order and safeguard the rights and interests of citizens in the new situation. Effective regulation of law enforcement powers and substantive protection of citizens' rights. Journalist: This revision aims to further standardize and safeguard law enforcement, improve relevant punishment procedures, and make provisions for specific situations such as police officers presenting police credentials and "one person law enforcement". How do you think the newly revised Public Security Administration Punishment Law will standardize law enforcement procedures and better protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens? Housing Protection Country: Procedural justice is the guarantee of substantive justice. The key progress of this amendment is to achieve effective regulation of law enforcement power and substantive protection of citizens' rights through refined program design, and to promote the transformation of public security management from a "power oriented" to a "rights based" approach. Among them, the establishment of the "system for sealing records of public security violations" has profound significance, demonstrating legal care for offenders, especially minors, to return to society. This system weakens the "label effect" and avoids unnecessary obstacles to individual long-term development caused by a single mistake. It is an organic combination of legal punishment and educational rescue functions, highlighting the progress of legal civilization. The transparency and traceability of the law enforcement process have been significantly strengthened. The new law specifies that key law enforcement processes such as inquiry and verification, on-site inspection, and detention should be recorded and recorded synchronously throughout the entire process. This technical specification actually constructs a "system barrier", which is not only conducive to fixing evidence and preventing disputes, but also forces law enforcement to always adhere to the rule of law and effectively curb the arbitrariness of law enforcement. At the same time, it is clarified that police officers must present a "police officer certificate" when enforcing the law, and the application of "one person law enforcement" is strictly limited. These detailed regulations make the law enforcement initiation process more serious and standardized, further enhancing the authority and credibility of law enforcement behavior. The newly revised Public Security Administration Punishment Law has achieved significant breakthroughs in procedural justice, mainly reflected in the innovation of two key systems. Firstly, the law has greatly expanded the scope of application of the hearing procedure, especially for cases involving minors. It has clarified the obligation of public security organs to inform, the relevant requirements for listening to opinions, and the rules for non-public hearings, effectively safeguarding the rights of parties to make statements and defend themselves. Furthermore, by enhancing procedural participation, the fairness and acceptability of punishment decisions have been improved. The second is the formal implementation of the leniency system for confessing guilt and accepting punishment, advocating the use of diversified dispute resolution methods such as party reconciliation in specific circumstances to handle cases, and adopting more flexible law enforcement measures. The goal is to achieve the social effect of "settling cases and bringing peace to people" within the legal framework, demonstrating the organic integration of the principle of proportionality between excessive punishment and law enforcement efficiency. The comprehensive introduction of the above procedural provisions places the operation of law enforcement power in a more stringent environment of sunshine supervision and institutional restrictions, requiring law enforcement officers not only to become the subject of illegal behavior, but also to become loyal practitioners of the rule of law and staunch defenders of civil rights. The fundamental purpose is to make every law enforcement link rigorous and transparent, so that the people can truly understand fairness and justice, and thus consolidate the cornerstone of a rule of law society. The protection of minors by law is not an unconditional exemption. Journalist: What provisions have been made in the newly revised Public Security Administration Punishment Law regarding the correction and protection of minors? What guiding significance does this have for reality? Fang Baoguo: This amendment focuses on improving the protection of minors, with the core essence shifting from simple "leniency" to "equal emphasis on punishment and educational correction", building a governance system that combines rigidity and resilience, and striving to solve the problem of "small evils not being punished and accumulating difficulties that are difficult to return" in practice. Firstly, the law prudently adjusts the standards for the execution of administrative detention: for minors who are over 14 years old but under 16 years old, if they have violated the law twice or more within one year, or if they have violated the law for the first time but the circumstances are serious and the impact is severe, they will no longer be exempted from administrative detention. This adjustment sends a clear signal: the protection of minors by law is not an unconditional exemption for serious illegal acts, and age cannot be used as a "talisman" for reckless behavior. It helps to correct the misconception that "the law does not hold children responsible" and demonstrates the authority of the law. More importantly, the new law focuses on filling the governance vacuum after the "no punishment" policy. It is explicitly stipulated that for minors who are not punished or detained due to their age, public security organs must take timely measures including psychological intervention, social observation, and specialized corrective education in accordance with the provisions of the Law on the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency. This changes the previous simplification of "letting it go" and extends the endpoint of legal evaluation from "whether to punish" to "how to correct it", promoting intervention measures to fundamentally eliminate their behavioral tendencies. This reflects the essence of the principle of "education first, punishment as a supplement" and is a true responsibility for the future development of minors. The law also explicitly includes student bullying in the scope of public security management penalties and strengthens the reporting and disposal responsibilities of schools. This means that campus bullying is no longer just a disciplinary issue within the campus, but an illegal behavior regulated by law. This provides a stronger public relief channel for victims and a legal lever for building a collaborative governance system of family school police linkage. In addition, severely punishing the organization and coercion of minors to engage in paid companionship and other behaviors reflects the law's zero tolerance attitude towards eroding the healthy growth environment of minors, and is committed to purifying their living space. In summary, the new law has established a new paradigm for the judicial protection of minors that integrates "punishment correction protection" through precise control of punishment gradients, mandatory connection of corrective education, and severe crackdown on specific harmful behaviors. Its guiding significance lies in promoting the formation of a joint force among society, schools, and families, guiding lost youth in the right direction through the rule of law, and safeguarding their healthy growth. Add a clause on legitimate defense to defend the principle that 'the law cannot make concessions to the unlawful'. Reporter: The newly revised Public Security Administration Punishment Law has made provisions on legitimate defense. What do you think are the practical considerations behind this? Fang Baoguo: The newly added justifiable defense clause is a key step in responding to social concerns and defending the rule of law spirit of "law cannot give way to illegality" in this amendment. Its practical considerations are profound, aiming to solve the long-standing dilemma of "mutual fighting" identification that has plagued law enforcement practice, and provide clear legal expectations and firm institutional guarantees for citizens to bravely fight against illegal behavior. In the past, when faced with sudden illegal infringement, the reasonable resistance of citizens was easily characterized as "fighting each other" in law enforcement practice, resulting in the result of "whoever is injured is right" and "each is punished fifty times". This not only undermines the courage of citizens to protect their own rights, but also blurs the line between right and wrong to a certain extent, and even fuels the flames of illegality. The new law clearly stipulates that acts carried out to stop illegal infringement are not considered illegal as long as they do not "clearly exceed the necessary limits". This regulation clarifies the boundary between legitimate defense and acts that violate public security management from a legislative perspective. It guides law enforcement officers to first determine whether there is "unlawful infringement", whether defensive behavior is "ongoing", and whether it is "clearly beyond necessary limits" when dealing with such conflicts, rather than simply judging responsibility based on results. This requires law enforcement officers to have higher legal literacy and the ability to distinguish facts, and to shift their focus from post dispute resolution to in-depth exploration of the causes and right and wrong of events, in order to achieve more accurate qualitative discretion. In the social governance system, public relief is not omnipotent. When emergency situations arise where public power cannot intervene immediately, citizens' legitimate defense rights become an important supplement to maintaining individual safety and public order. The law explicitly recognizes this, essentially encouraging citizens to bravely and confidently fight against illegal activities in emergency situations. This is not only a self-defense of rights, but also a manifestation of justice. It helps to cultivate citizens' belief in the rule of law and sense of ownership, consolidate the social consensus of "evil does not suppress right", and promote social righteousness. Therefore, the incorporation of the justifiable defense clause is not a technical repair, but an important declaration and correction of legal value orientation. It makes the treatment