Firstly, there is no official recognition of the investigation industry in China even though brand protection must involve some form of investigation work. Training is therefore conducted in-house and here lies similar problems I found 20 years ago in our industry in Australia; the likelihood of the blind leading the blind.

To illustrate this, I recently attended a meeting with one of the largest investigation companies in China, based in Guangzhou. I was with my client who required us to locate and develop relationships with external investigation companies with a view to expanding our anti-counterfeiting program China wide.

This investigation company appeared to be an obvious choice; they touted 20 or more in-house staff including an investigation manager, administrative and sales staff as well as alleging more than 300 investigators based in key locations around China. We met the owner of the company. He had been in business for only a few years and did not have a law enforcement background or any form of training. He did mention having a close friend who was high up in the police force. Not that I'm against non law enforcement types getting into the industry, but they need to do the hard yards, like everyone else. We met their senior investigations manager. He was a westerner who also had no background in the investigations industry, but he did speak great Mandarin, which was why he was employed. We later met an investigations team leader who admitted he had no background and no training in investigation work but he spoke great English, which is why he was employed. He admitted that all 300 investigators working for the company do not actually "work" for the company but are engaged on a "find it and get paid for it" basis. There was, I think, 10 or more copies of their PoA's (Powers of Attorney) on the boardroom wall. This is scary stuff.

My point is that without some form of professional training, at least in the area of basic investigation techniques as it relates to Intellectual Property rights, investigators, agents, ops or how they are referred to in China are pretty much left to tend to their own devices and therefore evidence will ultimately suffer integrity. This is very unfair to the investigators themselves and should be addressed.

As mentioned previously, investigators are witnesses. You don't want witnesses providing statements to police that are false simply because evidence was improperly gained or no notes were taken. There are many more reasons than this.

Should brand owners raise the bar? Yes, they should. Granted, it's not likely the Chinese Government will initiate a licensing system for "Private" investigators and perhaps I have to agree on that score for reasons beyond the scope of this article. However, I see no reason why a licensing system shouldn't be initiated in China, one which includes some form of approved training, in-house or externally.

About the Author:

Phill Arnold - Director of CISAA   22 years of Investigation Experience, 11 of those in IP case management. Phill is a passionate advocate for ethical investigation practices with a track record of Investigative excellence across the world.

CISAA China conduct in-depth research and analysis relating to counterfeiting organizations on behalf of brand owners in industries such as imaging supplies, pharmaceuticals, electronics and fashion. If you need advice on any of the material provided herein, please contact Phill Arnold at phill@cisaa.com.au

Watch Video About CISAA Services»

Read About the Internet Countermeasures Program»