Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court has issued a notification emphasizing the prevention of illegal extraterritorial law enforcement and profit-driven judicial practices, addressing local protectionism in handling enterprise-related cases [1][4]. Group 1: Legal Framework and Guidelines - The notification mandates the strict implementation of the case registration system, ensuring the protection of parties' litigation rights and prohibiting delays or selective case registrations [2][5]. - It emphasizes the principle of legal jurisdiction, prohibiting the expansion of jurisdiction for profit-driven purposes and ensuring that civil cases are not dismissed under criminal pretenses [2][4]. - The notification highlights the need to distinguish between economic disputes and criminal offenses, reinforcing legal principles such as equality before the law and the presumption of innocence [5][6]. Group 2: Addressing Local Protectionism - The issue of local protectionism in the judiciary is underscored, with calls for reforms to ensure the uniform application of national laws and to mitigate the influence of local interests [4][6]. - The notification reiterates the importance of preventing the artificial creation of extraterritorial jurisdiction and the expansion of jurisdiction based on local interests [4][5]. - Legal experts have pointed out that the misuse of jurisdiction is often linked to local protectionism, particularly in cases involving online and economic crimes [2][3]. Group 3: Enforcement Measures - The notification specifies the need for precise application of asset seizure and freezing measures, ensuring that such actions do not unduly impact normal business operations [6]. - It calls for the differentiation between illegal gains and legitimate assets, prohibiting the seizure of unrelated properties [6]. - The notification also emphasizes the need for fair judicial review of administrative cases involving enterprises, aiming to rectify issues such as arbitrary fines and inspections [6].

近日，最高人民检察院部署全国检察机关开展违规异地执法和趋利性执法司法专项监督工作，将聚焦11 个方面重点任务，综合运用"四大检察"职能，重点突出涉企刑事案件的监督办案，加强涉企刑事案件立 案监督、强制措施监督等。 趋利性执法司法，是指以执法司法办案为名，谋取经济利益、违规罚没财物等违法行为。实践中，其表 现形式多样：有的违规异地执法抓捕，肆意查封、冻结甚至划转外地企业和个人财产；有的将正常的合 同纠纷认定为合同诈骗，把企业正当融资认定为非法集资，以刑事手段干预经济纠纷；还有的为获取更 多罚没收入或其他经济利益，随意扩大管辖权。 党中央对趋利性执法问题一直高度重视，作出了一系列部署，彰显了整治趋利性执法司法的坚定立场。 去年9月召开的中央政治局会议明确指出，要进一步规范涉企执法、监管行为；中央经济工作会议提 出"开展规范涉企执法专项行动"。今年以来，整治行动持续推进，从国务院办公厅印发《关于严格规范 涉企行政检查的意见》，到"两高"报告均强调对相关问题的打击整治，再到近期"两高两部"纷纷动员部 署专项行动，明确将整治违规异地涉企执法和趋利性执法作为重点任务。 整治趋利性执法司法的关键，在于把权力关进制度的笼子里 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes that the rule of law is the best business environment, highlighting the ongoing legislative process of the Private Economy Promotion Law, which aims to enhance the legal status and protection of the private economy in China [1][2]. Summary by Sections Legislative Progress - The Private Economy Promotion Law draft is undergoing its second review, with improvements noted in its execution and specificity regarding various issues faced by private enterprises [1][3]. Key Highlights of the Law - The law establishes fundamental principles such as equal treatment, fair competition, and equal protection, affirming the legal status of the private economy as a vital component of the socialist market economy [3]. - It includes detailed provisions addressing specific challenges faced by private enterprises, enhancing its enforceability and protective measures [3][4]. Legal and Regulatory Recommendations - There is a suggestion to further refine the legal responsibilities concerning accountability for violations, enhancing the law's deterrent effect [4]. - The principle of "law permits what is not prohibited" should guide private enterprises in their innovative business practices, ensuring they do not fear legal repercussions as long as they operate within legal boundaries [5]. Addressing Enforcement Issues - Recommendations include strictly limiting the authority to freeze corporate bank accounts, ensuring that such measures are necessary, reasonable, and proportionate [8]. - There is a call for clearer regulations regarding the restriction of personal freedom for corporate leaders to prevent operational disruptions [9]. Tackling "Involution" Competition - "Involution" competition is identified as a form of unfair competition, primarily driven by leading companies abusing their market dominance, which threatens the survival of smaller enterprises and harms consumer interests [13]. - A multi-faceted approach is suggested to combat "involution" competition, including strict enforcement of antitrust laws and enhancing corporate credit evaluation systems [14]. Bankruptcy Law Revisions - The article highlights the need for improvements in the bankruptcy law, particularly in the areas of bankruptcy liquidation and reorganization, to better protect creditor and consumer rights while promoting economic development [15].