Ministry of Public Security Proposes Revisions to Traffic Accident Regulations: Clarifies Use of Autonomous Driving and Other Vehicle Electronic Data as Evidence

On May 8, the Ministry of Public Security opened for public comment a draft decision (for solicitation of opinions) on amending the "Provisions on Procedures for Handling Road Traffic Accidents." The proposed revision involves nine articles and includes the following key adjustments: First, to align with the current electronic implementation of motor vehicle inspection compliance marks and insurance marks, the circumstances requiring drivers to report accidents involving property damage—previously triggered by the absence of an inspection compliance mark or insurance mark—will be revised to apply only when a vehicle has "not passed the required safety and technical inspection" or "has not been insured as required under the compulsory motor vehicle traffic accident liability insurance." Corresponding adjustments will also be made to the verification duties of traffic police. Second, the procedures for handling accidents and delivering accident determination documents will be optimized. Accidents eligible for simplified procedures may be handled on-site or remotely by a single traffic officer. Where accidents are processed remotely via the internet or video conferencing, the accident determination document may be delivered electronically without requiring the parties’ signatures. Third, requirements for on-scene investigations will be improved. Two new methods for securing evidence—video recording and real-scene 3D data capture—will be added, allowing investigators to select one or a combination of methods based on the specific circumstances of the accident. Additionally, scene diagrams and investigation records may be prepared after the scene has been cleared, provided they are signed by a traffic police officer. For property-damage-only accidents or minor-injury accidents where technical surveillance equipment, vehicle event data recorders, or other existing materials sufficiently establish the facts and causes—or where facts are clear and liability is undisputed even without such records—scene diagrams and investigation records need not be produced. Fourth, the scope of admissible electronic data as evidence will be expanded. It will be explicitly stipulated that traffic management departments of public security organs may obtain electronic data directly related to the accident—including data from vehicle event data recorders, automotive event data recording systems, telematics service and management system onboard terminals, dynamic vehicle monitoring devices, and autonomous driving data recording systems—as evidentiary material. Fifth, rules for determining liability in hit-and-run cases will be adjusted. The circumstances under which fleeing parties may receive reduced liability will be narrowed, and it will be stipulated that even if liability is reduced, the final assigned liability must not be less than equal responsibility, thereby maintaining deterrence against hit-and-run behavior. Sixth, requirements for conclusions in accident determination reviews will be refined. If flaws exist in the original investigation but do not affect the outcome, the reviewing authority may refrain from ordering a new investigation; instead, it shall note the corrections made in its review conclusion. Before the original investigating unit issues a new accident determination, it must obtain approval from the next higher-level traffic management department of the public security organ.