Summary of Key Points
The draft revision to the Road Traffic Safety Law, which is currently being reviewed by the National People's Congress, marks the first time that autonomous driving has been officially recognized at the national legal level in China. This move ends the awkward situation of the past decade or so, during which autonomous driving was only subject to local pilot programs and minor departmental regulations. It clearly defines the legal status of autonomous driving on the road, the core logic for responsibility allocation, and the basic framework for insurance. It removes the biggest obstacle that had been hanging over automakers and consumers—uncertainty about who would be responsible in the event of an accident—thus providing a “green light” for the large-scale adoption of autonomous driving across the industry.
---
Detailed Analysis
1. Why is it necessary to establish national-level legislation for autonomous driving now? The previous loopholes could no longer be tolerated
Previously, the rules for autonomous driving in China were rather fragmented: they consisted of regulatory documents issued by various departments or local regulations set by pilot cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen. These had three inherent issues:
- Limited jurisdiction: A license for autonomous driving tests in Shanghai might not be valid in neighboring Jiangsu, lacking a legal basis for cross-regional operation.
- Disparate liability rulings: In previous autonomous driving accidents, courts have awarded different levels of responsibility to either the car owner or the automaker, without a national standard, leaving both parties uncertain about their obligations.
- Industry constraints: Automakers were hesitant to promote advanced autonomous driving systems due to the risk of significant financial losses in the event of an accident, and consumers were reluctant to purchase such vehicles for fear of bearing the full responsibility. With the new national legislation, a unified set of rules is established, providing reassurance to the entire industry.
2. The most revolutionary core rule: In the event of a violation while the vehicle is driving autonomously, the automaker is held accountable, not the owner
The most beneficial aspect of the draft is the complete reversal of the previous principle that “the person driving the vehicle is always responsible for any violation.” The draft clearly distinguishes between “assisted driving” (L2) and “autonomous driving” (L3 and above). L2 systems, which typically assist with tasks like braking and maintaining lane position but still require human intervention, are considered assisted driving, and any resulting accidents are the driver’s responsibility. Only L3 and above systems, which can operate completely without human intervention in designated scenarios (e.g., closed highways or specific parks), are recognized as “autonomous driving vehicles” by law.
The responsibility is determined based on whether the driving system has taken over all control. If an accident occurs while the autonomous driving function is active, the automaker is held accountable, and any fines or points deducted from the driver’s license are applied to the automaker. If the automaker wants to argue that the accident was caused by the driver’s misuse, it must provide evidence, relieving the driver of the burden of proving their innocence.
3. Insurance rules provide dual protections: Consumers will no longer face financial ruin in the event of autonomous driving accidents
A major concern for many was the potential for high financial losses in the event of an accident. The draft establishes a mandatory compulsory insurance requirement for all autonomous driving vehicles, providing a basic level of protection. When specific regulations are issued by the State Council, it is likely that a dual insurance model will be implemented: standard car insurance for routine driving and additional insurance specifically for autonomous driving. For autonomous driving mode, the risks are borne by the automaker, and the corresponding insurance premiums will also be paid by them. This encourages automakers to invest in safer technology.
4. The current legislation is a framework with room for improvement
The draft does not attempt to establish all rules in one go, recognizing that overly strict regulations could hinder technological development. Instead, it sets the overall direction and leaves several areas to be clarified later:
- Transition between human and automated driving: There are still uncertainties regarding the responsibility in situations where the system requests driver intervention but the accident occurs before the driver can respond. These details will be clarified in subsequent implementation regulations.
- Extension of liability: The draft only covers administrative responsibilities for traffic violations like running red lights and crossing lines; civil and criminal liabilities for more serious accidents will be refined as technology matures.
- L2 assisted driving: Since 90% of new cars use assisted driving, the draft does not specify the owner’s responsibilities during this mode. Future regulations will clarify that owners must remain alert and not engage in distracting activities (e.g., using phones while driving).
- Anti-hacking measures: Regulations will address the issue of unauthorized modifications to autonomous driving systems, ensuring that such modifications do not result in unsafe operations on public roads.
In summary, the new national legislation marks a significant step forward for the autonomous driving industry, providing clarity, legal recognition, and necessary protections for both automakers and consumers.