Chinese Court Dismisses Bigamy Charge Over Husband’s Extramarital Child, Igniting Calls for Legal Reform
In a case that has quickly become a flashpoint for debate over China’s bigamy law, a woman’s criminal complaint that her husband had committed the crime of “重婚罪” – bigamy – was dismissed by an appellate court, despite the fact that he had fathered an illegitimate daughter with another woman. The ruling, handed down on August 11, 2025 by the Hainan Province Second Intermediate People’s Court, has ignited a wave of criticism on Chinese social media and renewed calls for legal reform.
11 August 2025
The dispute began in 2008 when A‑fang and A‑hua registered their marriage in a small city in Hunan province. Years later, A‑hua began an extramarital relationship that resulted in the birth of a daughter. According to the birth certificate, A‑hua is listed as the child’s father, and the couple’s WeChat chats show the two referring to each other as “husband” and “wife.” A‑fang, who says she supported A‑hua’s business ventures and helped manage the family’s assets, filed a criminal private prosecution against him for bigamy, arguing that the evidence demonstrated a second, marital‑like partnership.
The first‑instance court rejected the claim, ruling that while A‑hua’s affair and the resulting child were clear, the law on bigamy requires proof that the parties “cohabited as husband and wife” in the eyes of neighbors, friends and relatives – a standard the court said the evidence did not meet. A‑fang appealed, contending that the official birth certificate and the intimate language used in the digital messages should suffice to establish a public, conjugal relationship.
In its August decision, the Hainan appellate panel upheld the lower court’s judgment. The judges reiterated that the burden of proof lies on the complainant to demonstrate that the second relationship was presented to the community as a marriage, not merely a clandestine affair. Since no testimony or documentary evidence showed that A‑hua and his mistress lived together in a way that would lead outsiders to regard them as a married couple, the court concluded that the statutory elements of bigamy were not satisfied.
Legal scholars note that the ruling reflects a strict, literal reading of Article 258 of China’s Criminal Law, which defines bigamy as “the act of marrying another person while a previous marriage is still in effect, or cohabiting with another as husband and wife.” The emphasis on “public cohabitation” means that even when a husband acknowledges paternity and maintains a regular relationship with a child, the crime may not be charged if the partnership remains hidden from the public sphere.
The case has resonated far beyond the courtroom. On Weibo, users expressed disbelief that the birth of a child could not, on its own, constitute evidence of bigamy. Comments such as “A child has been born and it still doesn’t prove it – what exactly counts as bigamy?” and “If you don’t admit to being a couple, you can’t be convicted – what’s the point of the law?” have amassed thousands of likes and reposts. Some observers have linked the decision to a broader sense of marital insecurity, noting that “no wonder fewer people are getting married now” in a society where legal recourse appears limited.
The All‑China Women’s Federation, a state‑affiliated advocacy group, has seized on the public outcry, urging the Supreme People’s Court to issue interpretative guidance that would broaden the definition of bigamy to encompass situations like A‑hua’s. Meanwhile, a separate but thematically similar case involving Li Hui, a former teacher turned entrepreneur, and his wife Meng Ling, reached the Heshan District People’s Court in Yiyang. There, Meng’s attempt to hold Li accountable for bigamy after he fathered a daughter with a woman he described as a “colleague” was also keep those relationships out of public view. “The law was designed to protect the sanctity of marriage, but in practice it can leave the aggrieved spouse without remedy,” said Professor Wang Li of Beijing’s School of Law.
As the discussion continues, the case highlights a tension in Chinese society between traditional expectations of marital fidelity and the realities of modern relationships. For A‑fang, the court’s decision means she remains unable to secure a criminal conviction against her husband, despite the tangible proof of his infidelity and paternity. For observers, it signals that until the statutes governing bigamy are reinterpreted or amended, many women may find themselves similarly powerless in the face of concealed, yet consequential, extramarital unions.
