Beijing court clarifies scope of 'hit-and-run' laws

A Beijing court clarified on Tuesday that instructing a passenger to take the blame for a traffic accident in order to evade legal responsibility should be considered a hit-and-run.

Coinciding with National Traffic Safety Day, the Beijing Changping District People's Court revealed a recent case in which a passenger — in an attempt to conceal the true identity of the offender — falsely assumed responsibility for a traffic accident so the offender could evade legal consequences.

According to the case, on March 14, 2023, the defendant, surnamed Fan, drove his car after drinking east to west in a crossing and collided with a motorcyclist surnamed Yuan, causing Yuan injuries.

At the scene the accident, Fan called the police but instructed his passenger with the surname Wang to pose as the driver of the vehicle to help Fan evade police investigation. Meanwhile, Fan accompanied the injured Yuan to the hospital. Unfortunately, Yuan later died despite rescue efforts.

On April 24 that year, the police summoned Fan for questioning, but he claimed he was not the driver. It was not until the later stages of the investigation that Fan finally admitted to being the driver of the car involved in the accident.

According to the road traffic accident report, Fan's failure to yield while driving was identified as the primary cause of the accident, while Yuan's speeding was a secondary factor. Additionally, Fan was deemed to have committed a hit-and-run, leading to the conclusion that Fan bore full responsibility for the accident, with Yuan being absolved of any responsibility.

On Jan 26, 2024, the court convicted Fan of traffic-related offenses and sentencing him to four years in prison.

Wang Jia, deputy chief judge of the court's criminal division, cited the law stating that determining a hit-and-run requires considering whether an individual intend to evade legal responsibility and whether there is an act of fleeing after the incident. "Essentially, the core aspect is the intent to avoid legal consequence," she emphasized.

In this case, Fan did not flee the scene and promptly helped the victim, but he instructed someone else to take the blame and repeatedly denied being the driver until conclusive evidence emerged. His behavior had shown his intent to avoid legal responsibility, so he should be considered to have committed a hit-and-run, according to the judge.

She further explained that although Fan was deemed fully responsible for the traffic accident due to his hit-and-run behavior, the primary cause of the accident was his failure to yield as required by traffic regulations. Yuan's speeding was a secondary cause. "This means that even if Fan had not fled, he would still bear the primary responsibility for the accident," she added.