BEIJING, April 16 (Xinhua) -- China's newly introduced rules on countering foreign long-arm jurisdiction are expected to bolster the country's responses to such practices, according to legal experts and observers.

China on Monday unveiled a set of 20-article regulations on countering foreign states' unlawful extraterritorial jurisdiction measures, stipulating that the Chinese government has the authority to take countermeasures in response to such actions.

According to the new rules, such extraterritorial jurisdiction measures refer to actions taken by a foreign country that violate international law and the basic norms governing international relations and that harm China's sovereignty, security and development interests, or the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese citizens and organizations.

An official of the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) said the countermeasures are a defensive move. The regulations, formulated out of China's holistic approach to national security and based on the country's laws on national security, foreign relations and countering foreign sanctions, aim to promote a more just and equitable global governance system, the official said.

Experts pointed out that the introduction of the rules demonstrates Beijing's continuous efforts to strengthen its legal and policy toolkit in response to challenges posed by foreign long-arm jurisdiction.

According to international law, the exercise of a country's jurisdiction over a person or entity outside its territory generally requires that the person or entity or their conduct has a real and sufficient connection to that country.

Some countries, however, are exercising "long-arm jurisdiction" on the basis of the "minimum contacts" rule, continually lowering the threshold for application.

Over the years, long-arm jurisdiction has become a means by which relevant countries abuse unilateral sanctions, especially secondary sanctions.

Chinese authorities have repeatedly expressed firm opposition to the abuse of unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction.

In 2021, the Ministry of Commerce issued a set of rules on blocking unjustified extraterritorial application of foreign laws and measures. Later that year, the national legislature adopted the Law on Countering Foreign Sanctions.

Liao Shiping, a professor at the Law School of Beijing Normal University, said China's efforts in pursuing high-standard opening up require a stable international environment. However, some foreign countries' unlawful extraterritorial jurisdiction measures have brought about tremendous uncertainties.

The new rules, through their deterrent and blocking effects, are expected to mitigate the impact of such measures, Liao said.

Analysts pointed out that the new regulations carry direct implications for Chinese companies seeking to safeguard their overseas-related rights and will significantly boost companies' confidence in responding to external bullying.

In particular, they may be used to address issues such as certain countries imposing secondary sanctions by threatening third-country firms, or the extraterritorial spillover of export controls caused by certain countries' enforcement of rules like "de minimis."

Moreover, experts noted that while China's previous legal responses to foreign sanctions and relevant countermeasures were mostly focused on the economic and trade domain, the new rules represent a shift toward a more comprehensive, law-based response at the national level, rather than treating such matters as purely commercial.

Huo Zhengxin, a law professor at China University of Political Science and Law, said some countries have, for some time, increasingly resorted to unlawful extraterritorial jurisdiction in disregard of international law, seeking to compel Chinese enterprises and individuals to comply with their domestic legislative, judicial and administrative measures.

This trend has not only seriously disrupted the order of the market economy and rule-of-law environment in China, but has also undermined multilateralism and the foundations of the international legal order.

The new rules provide explicit legal grounds for Chinese authorities to take countermeasures, sending a firm "no" to those who disrupt and undermine the international order, and underscoring China's determination to safeguard that order through legal means, Huo said.

The new rules also equip China's countermeasures with real "teeth," ensuring their effective enforcement, the observers said.

The regulations establish a system of a malicious entity list targeting foreign organizations and individuals that promote or participate in the implementation of a foreign state's unlawful extraterritorial jurisdiction measures.

For those on the list, the authorities may impose countermeasures such as denying visa issuance, refusing entry, requiring departure within a specified time limit, repatriation or deportation.

The authorities may also revoke or restrict their eligibility to work, stay, or reside in China, seal, seize or freeze their property within China, and prohibit or restrict organizations and individuals in China from engaging in related transactions and cooperation with them.

Their involvement in China-related import and export activities or their investments within China may also be banned or restricted.

The regulations state that no organization or individual shall enforce or assist in enforcing such unlawful jurisdiction measures, adding that relevant violators may be subject to prohibition orders.

The MOJ official said that, as multiple countries and regions have introduced mechanisms such as injunctions to block and counter foreign long-arm jurisdiction, China's regulations in this regard have drawn on relevant international practices and taken into account practical needs.

Ye Yan, an adjunct professor at Southwest University of Political Science and Law, pointed out that the international community already has substantial legislative experience in countering foreign long-arm jurisdiction and other unlawful extraterritorial jurisdiction measures.

The European Union enacted its Blocking Statute in 1996. Britain and Canada have also established legal frameworks for blocking and countering unjustified sanctions.

China's new rules send a clear signal that rejecting unjustified extraterritorial jurisdiction represents a mainstream consensus, Ye said.

The new regulations state that Chinese citizens and organizations affected by unlawful extraterritorial jurisdiction measures may bring legal action against those enforcing such measures. Government authorities will also provide guidance and support for these proceedings.

Civil litigation targeting unjustified extraterritorial jurisdiction is regarded as an effective complement to official countermeasures.

In 2024, a Chinese court heard the country's first tort case filed by a Chinese company under the law on countering foreign sanctions. The issue involved a contract default due to the counter-party's acts of compliance with another country's sanction measures. It was ultimately resolved through a court-mediated settlement.

Legal scholars believe the case made it clear to the international community that China does not endorse foreign countries' unilateral sanctions or discriminatory restrictions, and that compliance with these sanctions cannot serve as a "safe harbor" to evade liability for actions that harm Chinese enterprises' legitimate rights and interests. ■