Judicial Corruption Score in China
China: Judicial Corruption Score was -1.08 in 2025. ◆ Volatile
Latest (2025)
-1.08
Change on year
down 8.5%
World rank
133rd
of 176 countries
All-time high
1.89
in 1950
All-time low
-2.11
in 1789
Years of data
237
1789–2025
Judicial Corruption Score in China, 1789–2025
Source: V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data.
Analysis
The most recent figure for judicial corruption score in China is -1.08, measured in 2025.
Compared with earlier readings it is down 8.5% on the previous year and down 311.8% over ten years.
Over the whole period, judicial corruption score in China peaked at 1.89 in 1950 and was at its lowest, -2.11, in 1789.
That places China 133rd out of 176 countries with data for 2025, putting it in the bottom quarter.
The series is highly variable year to year, so single readings are best treated with caution.
Judicial Corruption Score in China, year by year
| Year | Value | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1789 | -2.11 | — |
| 1790 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1791 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1792 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1793 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1794 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1795 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1796 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1797 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1798 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1799 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1800 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1801 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1802 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1803 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1804 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1805 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1806 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1807 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1808 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1809 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1810 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1811 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1812 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1813 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1814 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1815 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1816 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1817 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1818 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1819 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1820 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1821 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1822 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1823 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1824 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1825 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1826 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1827 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1828 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1829 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1830 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1831 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1832 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1833 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1834 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1835 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1836 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1837 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1838 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1839 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1840 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1841 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1842 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1843 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1844 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1845 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1846 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1847 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1848 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1849 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1850 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1851 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1852 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1853 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1854 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1855 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1856 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1857 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1858 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1859 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1860 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1861 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1862 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1863 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1864 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1865 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1866 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1867 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1868 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1869 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1870 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1871 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1872 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1873 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1874 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1875 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1876 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1877 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1878 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1879 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1880 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1881 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1882 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1883 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1884 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1885 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1886 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1887 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1888 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1889 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1890 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1891 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1892 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1893 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1894 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1895 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1896 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1897 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1898 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1899 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1900 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1901 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1902 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1903 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1904 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1905 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1906 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1907 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1908 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1909 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1910 | -2.11 | -0.0% |
| 1911 | -1.67 | -20.9% |
| 1912 | -1.16 | -30.8% |
| 1913 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1914 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1915 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1916 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1917 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1918 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1919 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1920 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1921 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1922 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1923 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1924 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1925 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1926 | -1.16 | -0.0% |
| 1927 | -0.519 | -55.1% |
| 1928 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1929 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1930 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1931 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1932 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1933 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1934 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1935 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1936 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1937 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1938 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1939 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1940 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1941 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1942 | -0.519 | -0.0% |
| 1943 | -1.13 | +118.1% |
| 1944 | -1.13 | -0.0% |
| 1945 | -1.13 | -0.0% |
| 1946 | -1.13 | -0.0% |
| 1947 | -1.13 | -0.0% |
| 1948 | -1.13 | -0.0% |
| 1949 | 0.074 | -106.5% |
| 1950 | 1.89 | +2450.0% |
| 1951 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1952 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1953 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1954 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1955 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1956 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1957 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1958 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1959 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1960 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1961 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1962 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1963 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1964 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1965 | 1.89 | +0.0% |
| 1966 | 1.47 | -22.0% |
| 1967 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1968 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1969 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1970 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1971 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1972 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1973 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1974 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1975 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1976 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1977 | 1.47 | +0.0% |
| 1978 | 1.11 | -24.5% |
| 1979 | 0.912 | -18.0% |
| 1980 | 0.555 | -39.1% |
| 1981 | 0.44 | -20.7% |
| 1982 | 0.44 | +0.0% |
| 1983 | 0.136 | -69.1% |
| 1984 | 0.136 | +0.0% |
| 1985 | 0.136 | +0.0% |
| 1986 | 0.136 | +0.0% |
| 1987 | 0.136 | +0.0% |
| 1988 | 0.136 | +0.0% |
| 1989 | 0.136 | +0.0% |
| 1990 | -0.234 | -272.1% |
| 1991 | -0.234 | -0.0% |
| 1992 | -0.234 | -0.0% |
| 1993 | -0.59 | +152.1% |
| 1994 | -0.818 | +38.6% |
| 1995 | -0.818 | -0.0% |
| 1996 | -0.818 | -0.0% |
| 1997 | -0.818 | -0.0% |
| 1998 | -0.818 | -0.0% |
| 1999 | -0.818 | -0.0% |
| 2000 | -0.879 | +7.5% |
| 2001 | -0.879 | -0.0% |
| 2002 | -0.879 | -0.0% |
| 2003 | -0.879 | -0.0% |
| 2004 | -0.879 | -0.0% |
| 2005 | -0.469 | -46.6% |
| 2006 | -0.469 | -0.0% |
| 2007 | -0.469 | -0.0% |
| 2008 | -0.429 | -8.5% |
| 2009 | -0.429 | -0.0% |
| 2010 | -0.443 | +3.3% |
| 2011 | -0.443 | -0.0% |
| 2012 | -0.473 | +6.8% |
| 2013 | -0.263 | -44.4% |
| 2014 | -0.263 | -0.0% |
| 2015 | -0.263 | -0.0% |
| 2016 | -0.263 | -0.0% |
| 2017 | -0.281 | +6.8% |
| 2018 | -0.281 | -0.0% |
| 2019 | -0.218 | -22.4% |
| 2020 | -0.307 | +40.8% |
| 2021 | -0.307 | -0.0% |
| 2022 | -0.307 | -0.0% |
| 2023 | -0.618 | +101.3% |
| 2024 | -0.998 | +61.5% |
| 2025 | -1.08 | +8.5% |
China compared with similar countries
- China's -1.08 is below the median for upper middle income countries, which is -0.12, 9.0× the median. (48 countries reporting)
- China's -1.08 is below the median for East Asia & Pacific, which is 0.5635. (22 countries reporting)
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1780s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 1 |
| 1790s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1800s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1810s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1820s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1830s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1840s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1850s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1860s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1870s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1880s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1890s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1900s | -2.11 | -2.11 | -2.11 | 10 |
| 1910s | -1.3 | -2.11 | -1.16 | 10 |
| 1920s | -0.9656 | -1.16 | -0.519 | 10 |
| 1930s | -0.519 | -0.519 | -0.519 | 10 |
| 1940s | -0.8275 | -1.13 | 0.074 | 10 |
| 1950s | 1.89 | 1.89 | 1.89 | 10 |
| 1960s | 1.72 | 1.47 | 1.89 | 10 |
| 1970s | 1.38 | 0.912 | 1.47 | 10 |
| 1980s | 0.2387 | 0.136 | 0.555 | 10 |
| 1990s | -0.62 | -0.818 | -0.234 | 10 |
| 2000s | -0.666 | -0.879 | -0.429 | 10 |
| 2010s | -0.3191 | -0.473 | -0.218 | 10 |
| 2020s | -0.6033 | -1.08 | -0.307 | 6 |
Countries ranked near China
More social development data for China
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 230 (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 153,962 (2025)
- Political Rights Rating 7 (2025)
- Electoral democracy 0 (2025)
- Political rights rating fh, annual growth rate 0 % change on previous year (2025)
- Political rights rating fh, gaps filled 7 (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 0.0001 units per person (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 153,962 (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 0 units per person (2025)
- Refugees under the mandate of the UNHCR by country or territory of 0 units per US$ of GDP (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is judicial corruption score in China?
- Judicial corruption score in China was -1.08 in 2025, according to V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data.
- What is the highest judicial corruption score recorded in China?
- The highest recorded value was 1.89 in 1950.
- What is the lowest judicial corruption score recorded in China?
- The lowest recorded value was -2.11 in 1789.
- How does China rank for judicial corruption score?
- China ranks 133rd out of 176 countries with data for 2025.
- Is judicial corruption score rising or falling in China?
- Over the last ten years it is down 311.8%. The long-run trend across the full record is volatile.
- Where does this China data come from?
- The figures come from V-Dem (2026) – processed by Our World in Data, published as part of Judicial Corruption Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 237 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data).
About this data
Data by V-Dem. Expert estimates of how often individuals or businesses make undocumented extra payments or bribes to obtain a favorable judicial decision, or speed up or delay the process. Higher scores mean less corruption. A score of 0 is approximately the average across all countries and years.