Supreme People’s Court
Exemplary Advocates of the Supreme People’s Court of China,
When the idea of this court committee was first conceived, the intention was to create the single most unique experience any court could possibly provide. The goal was to create a court that forces the same type of critical thinking as crisis committees, whilst being themed as uniquely as special committees and maintaining the core structure of court. That idea, through extensive difficulty, struggle, and passion, has finally bloomed, and it is with great honor that I finally get to welcome you all to the Supreme People’s Court of China.
I am your president, “Your Honor” himself, Lucas Abuizzam. Court was never an idea that intrigued me as an “MUN-er” initially, I was always so fixated on the resolution-based format and never wanted to steer away from it, always wanting to improve at what I was already good at, which in a sense, completely halted my learning. However, I recently started to adopt the mentality of “When you stop learning, you start dying” which I believe applies to everyone, especially you reading this, and especially in the world of MUN. Having said that, in this context, challenge and discomfort is the one true breeder of learning. With this, there is absolutely nothing more challenging than a committee that is foreign in basically every aspect, from culture to legal system, to political views and motivations, and even spoken language; it is a one-of-a-kind-experience to even those with 15 experiences, or none at all. However, the fate of the Supreme People’s Court of China is not in my hands alone, whilst I have acted out my part in the success of this grand show, you reading this letter have an even bigger part to play as well. The success of this court, and the fate of the defendants “Guo Wengui” and “Alibaba Group”, is in your hands.
There is no better feeling in this world than having your name be announced as THE best advocate of the Supreme People’s Court in front of the hundreds of NOSMUN’24 attendees. However, winning is impossible without extensive preparation, dedication, passion, and struggle.
May the best advocate win.
Sincerely, your president,
Lucas Abuizzam
Case 1: People’s Republic of China v. Alibaba Group
Jack Ma, born September 10th, 1964, is the co-founder of Alibaba, a global technology corporation. Alibaba is one of the largest online wholesale marketplaces, and it covers everything you need to know about online trading. The business continues to lead the way in artificial intelligence, finance, logistics, and e-commerce.
Alibaba was fined on April 20, 2021, by China's State Administration for Market Regulation for breaking the anti-monopoly law; this law aims to prevent and limit monopolistic behavior, preserve fair market competition, and encourage the robust growth of the socialist market economy.
The investigation began in December 2020, when China's State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR), carried out dawn raids on the company's property to obtain information about its actions. Alibaba implemented a scheme to force traders to sell exclusively on its platform, to the detriment of current and potential competitors, sellers, consumers, and the economy as a whole. The highest penalty ever for breaking the Anti-Monopoly Law has been applied; charging a fine of 18.228 billion Chinese yuan (nearly EUR 2.4 billion). Despite Alibaba’s practice of forcing traders to select a single distribution platform, it was also criticized for claiming it did not break any anti-monopoly or unfair competition laws.
Secondly, Alibaba is being charged for “counterfeiting goods” and violating the “Anti-Monopoly Law” that is under articles 7 & 8 of the price laws of the People’s Republic in China that state, “The operators shall, in determining prices, abide by the principle of fairness, being in conformity with law, honesty and credibility” and “Production and management costs and market supply and demand situation shall be the fundamental basis for the determination of prices by the operators.”
The easy access to and widespread use of technology has made the production and sale of counterfeit goods easier than before. The global sale of these fraudulent replicas has been made easier by the Internet. A significant issue that Alibaba Group had to deal with was counterfeit sales on all of its websites. The company faced several challenges, including a deteriorating global reputation, and an increase in counterfeit goods, that led to multiple legal actions brought against it.
China's State Administration for Industry and Commerce accused Alibaba in January 2015 of not doing enough to stop the sale of counterfeit goods, bribery, and other illegal activities on its websites. In response, Alibaba accused a senior official at a government agency of misconduct and threatened to file a formal complaint. The SAIC (special agent in charge) released a "white paper" alleging that Alibaba turned a blind eye to the sale of fake cigarettes, alcohol, and branded handbags by vendors on its marketplace sites, as well as the sale of restricted weapons and other forbidden items.
The Supreme People’s Court of China must see that Alibaba is given a fair trial and verdict.
Case 2: People’s Republic of China V. Guo Wengui
Born on the 10th of May 1970 in Shandong China, Guo Wengui, also known as Miles Guo or Miles Kwok, is the billionaire owner of the Chinese GTV media group, and once the 73rd richest man in China. In 2015, Guo underwent self-imposed exile from China to New York City, United States. Due to his fear of arrest as a result of allegations made against him by the PRC, claiming money laundering and fraud, amongst other charges. Guo has remained in the United States ever since.
In 2017, he opened an X (formerly known as Twitter) account, where he frequently spoke against and criticized the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) alongside prominent officials, whilst exempting their leader Xi Jinping from said criticism. Guo has remained a vocal CCP critic thereon.
On the 15th of March 2023, Guo was arrested for conspiracy to defraud his online followers out of over $1 Billion. These included $452 million in unregistered offering $150 million in loans for GTV, and an additional $250 million. Upon his arrest, $634 million of these alleged fraud proceeds were seized by the United States government. The trial for Guo is yet to happen and is planned to begin on the 8th of April 2024, in the United States. Upon his arrest, Guo was faced with 11 charges by the New York authorities, facing a maximum sentence of 100 years in prison, claiming “securities fraud”, “wire fraud”, and “concealed money laundering”. Guo has pleaded not guilty to all 11 of these charges yet has remained in jail ever since his arrest, with the authorities withstanding his request for bail.
The accusation of fraud through Guo’s businesses such as GTV in this particular case has been different than the usual fraud case. In a standard fraud case such as the “FTX” or the “Theranos” cases, investors are tricked into believing something that differs from the truth, leaving said investors upset. In this case, there has been very little evidence of angry investors against Guo’s businesses, and many believe that his arrest could have to do with the CCP considering the borderline defamation Guo has carried out against them on social media. However, extensive legal documents by the Southern District of New York highlight many pieces of evidence that attempt to prove his guilt, such as an analysis of where the money of GTV’s investors went, stating that they went into Guo’s savings.
The Supreme People’s Court of China must see that Guo Wengui is given a fair trial and verdict.
Study Guide
Court Guide
The Supreme People’s Court of China Guide