In August 2026, the Shenzhen traffic police officially implemented a "four-choose-one" educational guidance model for minor traffic violations involving electric bicycles, replacing the previous simple penalty approach of "fine-only enforcement." According to the Shenzhen Special Zone Daily, violators may choose one of the following four options to receive experiential education: serving on-site as a traffic volunteer for no less than 15 minutes, copying traffic safety laws and regulations, holding a promotional sign in a relay station post for more than 15 minutes, or watching warning videos for at least 15 minutes. This initiative quickly sparked public discussion: do traffic police have the authority to substitute education for legally prescribed penalties? What happens if a violator refuses education? What legal

I. Legal Basis for Flexible Education: The Practice of the Principle of Combining Administrative Punishment with Education

The "choose one of four" model was not pioneered by Shenzhen, but systemizing and institutionalizing it reflects the principle of "combining punishment with education" as stipulated in Article 6 of the Administrative Penalties Law. This provision requires administrative organs, when imposing administrative penalties, to correct illegal acts and educate citizens, legal persons, or other organizations to consciously abide by the law. The exploration by Shenzhen's traffic police is precisely a concrete application of this principle in the field of traffic law enforcement.

From the perspective of legal hierarchy, the authority of traffic police to penalize violations involving electric bicycles derives from Article 89 of the Road Traffic Safety Law: pedestrians, passengers, and non-motor vehicle drivers who violate road traffic safety laws and regulations regarding road passage provisions shall be given a warning or a fine of not less than 5 yuan but not more than 50 yuan. However, this article also stipulates that if a non-motor vehicle driver refuses to accept the fine penalty, their non-motor vehicle may be impounded. This means that the law itself grants traffic police discretionary space between warnings and fines.

The "choose one out of four" education model essentially makes the penalty of "warning" concrete and experiential. Lawyers believe that this model does not break through the current legal framework, but rather better aligns with the principle of "punishment fitting the offense" in administrative penalties—for minor violations such as running red lights or not wearing a helmet, a 15-minute on-site experience allows violators to directly perceive the complexity and difficulty of traffic management work, and its educational effect often surpasses that of a mere fine.

II. Procedural Compliance: The Boundary Between Voluntary Choice and Mandatory Education

The core controversy of the "choose one of four" model is: must the party concerned accept education? If they refuse, will they face stricter penalties? According to the official statement from Shenzhen traffic police, this model applies to "parties who meet the conditions for education management," and the party is given the option to "choose any one of them." This implies that the educational measure is optional, not compulsory.

But the lawyer needs to remind: this right to choose is limited. If the party explicitly refuses to accept any of the educational measures, the traffic police may instead apply a fine penalty, or even detain the vehicle in accordance with Article 89 of the Road Traffic Safety Law. Therefore, the so-called "voluntariness" is in fact a choice between "accepting education" and "accepting a fine."

From the perspective of administrative procedures, when traffic police carry out educational guidance, they should fulfill their obligation to inform, clearly state the facts of the violation and the legal consequences of the educational options, and protect the party's right to make statements and defend themselves. If the traffic police fail to provide adequate notification, or force the party to choose a specific item (such as forcing them to copy traffic regulations by hand), it may constitute a procedural violation. When cooperating with education, citizens have the right to know why they were stopped, what the educational content is, and whether there are alternative options.

III. Practical Impact on Citizens: Does Accepting Education Equal Accepting Punishment? Will It Leave a Criminal Record?

Many citizens are concerned: does accepting the "choose one of four" education mean admitting to a violation? Will it leave a violation record that affects personal credit or vehicle annual inspection? Lawyers have clearly stated that accepting education is not equivalent to administrative punishment, and education records and violation punishment records are two separate systems.

The "four-choice-one" education is a form of administrative guidance or administrative order, rather than an administrative penalty. According to the Administrative Penalty Law, the types of administrative penalties include warnings, fines, confiscation of illegal gains, suspension or revocation of licenses, among others. Participating in education does not result in a formal record of fines or warnings, nor does it affect one's personal credit record. However, traffic police may register the violation information for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of the education. Such internal records are not disclosed to the public and do not affect the daily lives of ordinary citizens.

However, if the party refuses education and refuses to accept the fine, and the traffic police lawfully impound the vehicle, a formal record of administrative compulsory measures will be generated. Such a record may affect the subsequent handling of the vehicle and may even result in late fees. Therefore, from the perspective of protecting one's rights, lawyers advise citizens: if time permits, prioritize the education option; if you genuinely dispute the penalty, appeal through legal channels rather than confronting authorities forcefully on the spot, so as to avoid escalating the conflict.

4. Shortcomings and Improvements of Flexible Law Enforcement: How to Avoid "Formalization" and "Selective Enforcement"

While the "four-choice-one" model is commendable, lawyers also need to point out its potential risks. First, is the educational effect lasting? Fifteen minutes of copying traffic regulations or holding a sign while standing on duty may become a mere formality and fail to genuinely enhance traffic safety awareness. Second, are law enforcement standards consistent? Different traffic police officers may identify "minor violations" differently based on personal understanding, leading to "different education for the same violation." Third, there is the accessibility of educational options—for example, requiring delivery riders to stand on duty at the scene for 15 minutes may interfere with their delivery tasks and could instead breed resentment.

In response, lawyers suggest that Shenzhen traffic police should refine their operational guidelines, clarify specific circumstances of “minor violations” (such as first-time violations, no consequences caused, etc.), and establish a tracking and evaluation mechanism for educational effectiveness. At the same time, electronic education methods (such as scanning a QR code with a mobile phone to watch videos) could be introduced to reduce on-site waiting time and increase public acceptance.

For citizens, if they believe the traffic police's educational measures are improper, they may apply for administrative reconsideration in accordance with the Administrative Reconsideration Law, or file a complaint via the 12345 hotline. However, it should be noted that during administrative reconsideration or litigation, the execution of the traffic police's on-site decision shall not be suspended in principle, unless a guarantee is provided or a request for deferred execution is made.

V. Conclusion: Reminders and Professional Advice from Legal Professionals

The "four choices one" flexible education model adopted by Shenzhen traffic police is a beneficial exploration of the shift in administrative enforcement from "emphasis on punishment" to "emphasis on education." It retains the rigidity of the law while infusing it with the warmth of humanity, aligning with the principles of modern administrative rule of law. However, flexibility should not mean a lack of principles, and education should not degenerate into a disguised form of punishment.

As ordinary citizens, we should recognize that obeying traffic rules is not just about avoiding penalties, but also about being responsible for our own and others' safety. If there is a dispute over law enforcement, we should communicate rationally and protect our rights in accordance with the law. Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm has long focused on administrative law and traffic legal affairs, and can provide citizens with professional legal services such as traffic violation handling, administrative reconsideration, and administrative litigation. If you have questions about the "four-in-one" education model or your own traffic violation handling, feel free to consult us, and we will answer from a professional perspective.