CHINA Law and Practice Contributed by: Yang Cheng, Songshan Liu, Yan Yu and Weina Wang, Lantai Law Firm
All fact-finding must comply with personal information protection laws, and unlawful collection may under - mine the investigation and its evidentiary value. 4. Protection of the Parties During an HR Internal Investigation 4.1 Protection of the Reporter PRC labour law does not provide a standalone statu - tory regime for protecting reporters in private-sector internal investigations. However, employers owe a general duty of care to prevent foreseeable harm in the course of employment, which extends to employ - ees who report misconduct in good faith and may face retaliation or other adverse treatment. In practice, employers typically adopt proportionate protective measures based on the risk profile, such as safeguarding confidentiality, limiting access on a need-to-know basis, enforcing non-retaliation rules, and, where necessary, adjusting work arrangements or issuing no-contact instructions. Although more formal protection mechanisms exist in public-sector reporting frameworks, similar princi - ples of confidentiality and risk prevention are gener - ally regarded as reasonable benchmarks for private employers. Failure to take reasonable protective measures may expose employers to civil liability and adverse labour dispute outcomes, while proportionate and docu - mented measures help demonstrate procedural fair - ness and mitigate legal risk. 4.2 Protection of the Respondent Employers must take reasonable measures to pro - tect the respondent during an internal investigation. Regardless of the outcome, the respondent is entitled to protection of the following: • personality rights; • reputation; • privacy and personal information under the Civil Code; • labour law; and • data protection rules.
In practice, this is mainly achieved through confidenti - ality and information-control measures, such as: • limiting access on a need-to-know basis; • avoiding dissemination of unverified allegations; and • refraining from treating allegations as established facts before verification. Respondents should also be given a reasonable opportunity to explain or supplement their statements. Failure to adopt reasonable protective measures may expose employers to civil liability, data protection risks and adverse labour dispute outcomes, while propor - tionate confidentiality and fairness safeguards help support the defensibility of investigation results. 4.3 Measures Against the Respondent An employer may take interim or disciplinary meas - ures before an HR internal investigation is conclud - ed, provided that such measures are based on duly implemented internal rules, supported by reliable preliminary facts, and proportionate. PRC law does not require employers to wait for a final investigation report; the key issue is whether a sufficient factual and procedural basis exists. During an investigation, employers may adopt interim measures such as: • warnings; • suspension of sensitive access or authority; • contact restrictions; or • removal from specific duties. Where preliminary evidence already meets the statu - tory threshold for termination – such as serious viola - tion of company rules – termination may be effected without awaiting the investigation’s conclusion, sub - ject to statutory compliance. Both premature action and undue inaction carry legal risks. Measures taken without adequate factual sup - port may be held unlawful, while failure to act despite clear indications of serious misconduct may increase compliance and liability exposure. Timing and severity
110 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook