In the second half of 2025, the Chinese Communist Party launched an anti-corruption campaign in the field of bidding and tendering nationwide, starting from November 2012 (the month when the 18th National Congress was convened). It targeted four major areas including construction projects, government procurement, international bidding for electromechanical products, and procurement by state-owned enterprises. The campaign called for the public to submit clues and issues related to illegal activities, such as shady dealings, bid rigging, bribery, and influence peddling, and pledged to address them through proper procedures.
Jiangxi and Inner Mongolia were the first to issue announcements regarding this initiative. On July 28th, the Development and Reform Commission of Jiangxi Province announced that starting from 2025, they would solicit information from the public on any illegal activities related to bidding projects that occurred since November 2012. The deadline for submissions was set until December 31, 2026. The announcement specifically mentioned behaviors like collusion, bid-rigging, and illicit transactions would be investigated.
Soon after, several regions in Inner Mongolia issued similar notifications in August. The Forestry Bureau of Xilingol League announced that they were accepting complaints and reports related to projects in the four fields since November 2012. The Alxa League also provided a reporting hotline and email address with a submission period from August 2025 to December 31, 2026. Other areas like Chayouqianqi also outlined the submission deadline until December 31, 2026, indicating the campaign was being carried out throughout the autonomous region.
According to sources close to local governments, some officials in mainland China are privately questioning why the investigation is focused on the past 13 years instead of an earlier timeframe. This political signal has made them nervous, with some worrying they might be implicated while others believe it might be a way for local authorities to showcase loyalty. However, there has been no official response to these speculations yet.
Political analyst Wang Xiaoping, in an interview, commented: “After the conclusion of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2012, Xi Jinping took office as General Secretary, and anti-corruption was elevated to a prominent position – it was deemed as ‘related to the survival and extinction of the party and the state.’ Back then, he advocated for ‘hunting down tigers and flies together,’ which had uplifted many ordinary people as they thought real actions were going to be taken.”
Pausing for a moment, Wang continued, “The problem is, over the past decade, corruption seems to have increased despite the anti-corruption efforts. The big corrupt officials are not really afraid of being targeted, or they have their ways to handle it. This is the key issue.”
Wang Xiaoping believes that setting the starting point of the investigation in November 2012 is not only a significant political historical marker but also a signal of institutional change. He stated, “The announcements from Jiangxi and Inner Mongolia explicitly mention this timeline, indicating that it goes beyond just law enforcement. There is definitely a political implication behind this, and officials from other provinces might be resistant to it.”
Public opinion is widely concerned about why the investigation is limited to the past 13 years and does not extend further back to the periods of Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao’s rule.
Another scholar, Zhang Cheng, analyzed, “This is more of a political stance. After Xi Jinping came into power, anti-corruption became the core of his political agenda. Therefore, the investigation naturally starts from the beginning of his tenure. By setting this timeframe, it links the institutionalized fight against corruption directly to the current leadership, highlighting his legitimacy and continuity.”
He added, “This ’13-year investigation’ also shows that local officials are trying to pledge loyalty upwards.”
Sources mentioned that if the investigation were to delve into the 1990s or even earlier, it would pose significant challenges. The time span is too long, much of the data from that period may not have been preserved, and it could implicate high-ranking officials from the eras of Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao, making the political situation harder to control. Therefore, choosing November 2012 as the starting point was considered a relatively cautious approach.
Regarding the policy of setting time limits issued by Jiangxi and Inner Mongolia, a manager of a bidding department at a state-owned enterprise in Beijing, Mr. Liu, candidly remarked, “To be honest, many documents from a decade ago have already been archived or may have been lost. How to gather evidence in such cases poses a real challenge. Nevertheless, with this news spreading, those who held some power back then, even if they had accepted minor gifts like a mobile phone or a few bottles of high-end liquor, are beginning to feel uneasy.”
He further stated, “The bidding and tendering sector has always been a hotspot for corruption. By looking back thirteen years, the message is clear: whether it’s old debts or hidden rules, everything will be scrutinized.”
However, some lawyers have raised concerns. Lawyer Chen from a law firm in East China said, “If there is a comprehensive scrutiny of past activities, procedural justice is bound to be debated. In my opinion, the focus of the investigation should be on major projects and key areas rather than a blanket examination without distinguishing the circumstances.”
In fact, this is not the first large-scale “retrospective investigation.” It has been reported that Yunnan Province conducted a “six-year retrospective investigation (since 2014)” in the coal resources sector. Inner Mongolia had previously carried out a “twenty-year retrospective investigation” in the coal-related fields.
Human rights lawyers have cautioned that looking back thirteen years at most deals with the symptoms and fails to address the root cause of institutional corruption, which lies in the system itself.