In recent days, Ms. Wang from Lvliang City, Shanxi Province, exposed to the media that in September last year, a judge from the Lvliang Intermediate People’s Court inappropriately behaved towards her when he asked her to sign a document in his office and locked the door behind them. On April 10th, the police only initiated administrative proceedings against the judge in question, prompting netizens to question why criminal proceedings were not pursued.
According to a report by New Yellow River media on April 12th, Ms. Wang (alias) from Lvliang City recounted to journalists that on September 5, 2025, she was sexually harassed by Judge Lv in his office at the Lvliang Intermediate People’s Court while assisting with case inquiries.
In her complaints and reports, Ms. Wang stated that on August 26, 2025, Judge Lv obtained her phone number while handling her divorce case. On September 5, Judge Lv called her using the office phone, claiming that there was new evidence requiring her signature, and asked her to come to his office.
During the inquiry about the case that day, Judge Lv repeatedly harassed Ms. Wang verbally and physically. Ms. Wang provided evidence, stating, “There is audio proof that, despite my repeated refusals, he repeatedly hugged my waist, touched my sensitive areas, forcibly embraced and pulled me, and forcefully kissed my cheek. When I tried to leave, Judge Lv locked the door, asked if I found him old and unattractive, and expressed his liking for me multiple times, urging me to accept him. I firmly rejected him, using the excuse of needing to pick up my child to escape his advances.”
The report mentioned that a 16-minute recording obtained by journalists captured a woman repeatedly saying “no” in response to a man’s advances during their conversation. The man remarked, “When I saw you in court, your eyes were shining (beautiful)”; “You are really attractive”; “You’re shy too”; “If you agree, I will consider more”; “Do you think I’m old?”; “I didn’t say anything, but you’re considering it right”; “You have grown taller, more beautiful, really beautiful,” and such statements.
Ms. Wang stated that this was a recording she secretly made during her conversation with Judge Lv at the time of the incident.
On April 12th, the media reporter tried to contact the relevant authorities at the Lvliang Intermediate People’s Court multiple times via calls and text messages but received no response by the time of publication. On the same day, the reporter learned that after Ms. Wang reported the incident, the police initiated administrative proceedings on April 10.
While New Yellow River did not mention the time of the report, online sources indicated that Ms. Wang had previously reported the incident to the Lvliang Intermediate People’s Court and the disciplinary inspection commission but received no response for several months until the issue was exposed online, prompting police intervention.
Zhao Liangshan, a senior partner at the Shaanxi Hengda Law Firm and a renowned criminal defense lawyer, stated that if the police determined that the current situation did not meet the seriousness of a criminal offense, they would commence investigations through administrative procedures. “The case may also transition from an administrative case to a criminal case as required by law.”
Zhao noted that the core difference between the crime of indecent behavior and criminal acts of forced indecency lies in the behavior, level of coercion, and legal basis. Under the relevant provisions of the Law on Administrative Penalties for Public Security, for minor incidents involving occasional, mild physical touch or indecent behavior without severe consequences or resistance from the victim, a public security penalty of detention for between five to ten days may apply. On the other hand, under the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law, for acts of forced indecent behavior towards another person through violence, coercion, or other means, involving actions like locking the door, threatening with authority, repeated touching of private areas, forced hugging, and kissing against resistance, and displaying severe misconduct, the suspect may be liable for the crime of forced indecency and face a prison sentence of up to five years or detention.
The decision by the police to only initiate administrative proceedings against the judge raised public doubts.
Video blogger and prominent Weibo figure “5872 All Good” remarked, “Why is it an administrative case and not a criminal case when a judge from the Lvliang Intermediate People’s Court commits indecent acts in the office? The key to the criminal aspect lies in whether it constitutes forced indecency. Based on the 16-minute recording provided by the complainant, the author believes that the indecency is suspected of violating Article 237 of the Criminal Law regarding forced indecency:
1. Locking the door to control resistance: falls under ‘other coercive means’.
2. Judge’s identity + authoritative pressure + location stress: the woman felt powerless to resist.
3. Multiple touches to private areas, forced kissing: it goes beyond casual touch, involves demands for intimacy, and constitutes severe misconduct.
Given the severe nature of the complaint, which aligns with the criminal elements of forced indecency, it should be changed from an administrative case to a criminal case.”
Many netizens expressed their astonishment, “How can it just be administrative proceedings?”; “Knowing the law and breaking the law, and only administrative proceedings?”; “Are judges getting away too lightly?”; “It should be a criminal case, not administrative”; “What does administrative proceedings mean? Shouldn’t they be in jail instead?”