The "bone cases" and "difficult cases" that are difficult to advance are transformed into "real gold and silver" through cross enforcement measures such as promotion and supervision, becoming "demonstration cases" and "boutique cases" for resolving similar disputes. Recently, the Supreme People's Court held a press conference to report on the cross enforcement work of the people's courts and released relevant typical cases. Data shows that since the Supreme People's Court deployed cross enforcement pilot projects in 19 provincial (district, city) courts in October 2023, a total of 72843 cases of cross enforcement have been carried out in courts across the country, with 23119 cases made substantial progress or resolved, and the amount of enforcement in place is 39.891 billion yuan. Execution work is the "last mile" of judicial procedures, which is related to whether the legitimate rights and interests of the people can be protected, and whether the authority and credibility of the judiciary can be maintained. However, in practice, due to the difficulty in finding the debtor, finding the debtor's property, assisting the debtor, and moving the property that should be executed, the problem of "difficulty in execution" has always objectively existed, becoming a prominent problem that troubles the work of the court. In order to effectively solve the difficulty of execution and protect the timely realization of the rights and interests of the winning parties in accordance with the law, in recent years, people's courts at all levels have made a lot of efforts and explorations, continuously increased the strength of property investigation, strengthened the concept of good faith and civilized execution, strictly punished illegal acts of refusal to execute, actively promoted the deep integration of informatization and execution work, and made breakthrough progress and many achievements in solving the problem of difficult execution. At the same time, it should also be recognized that there are still some difficulties in the current court enforcement work, such as the debtor having property but unable to execute efficiently and steadily, high costs of remote enforcement, local protectionism, and limited court enforcement power. Against the backdrop of escalating conflicts between individuals and cases, how to improve the efficiency of enforcement work, how to effectively resolve the backlog of difficult cases in enforcement, and how to eliminate various interferences all test the wisdom and responsibility of judicial organs. Especially for some "bone cases" and "difficult cases", including cases involving high amounts of money, which are common in situations where the debtor is an important local enterprise, a large taxpayer, or even a key state-owned enterprise or administrative department. How to minimize the impact on the legitimate rights and interests of the debtor while protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the winning party in accordance with the law, and avoid "handling a case and collapsing a company", is a problem that the judicial authorities need to solve properly. Cross enforcement is an innovative working method adopted by the people's court to address the current difficulties in enforcement work, especially for major, difficult and complex cases and long-term unresolved cases. By designating and elevating enforcement through legal provisions, the executing court can transfer some cases that are difficult to execute to other courts for execution. This not only helps to break the situation where the original case was not executed, mobilize the enthusiasm and initiative to overcome difficulties, further crack down on evading enforcement behavior, but also helps to overcome local protectionism, allowing the court that accepts instructions to execute to push case execution without being bound, burdened, and completely independent according to law. From this typical public case, it can be seen that cross execution has played a positive role in solving the problem of difficult execution. Taking the "melamine" enforcement case as an example, it is one of the largest intellectual property cases in the country, and a certain company has not actively fulfilled its obligation to destroy equipment and other actions determined by the effective judgment. Due to the strong professionalism, certain danger, and huge cost of dismantling and destroying the equipment involved in the case, which will have a significant impact on employee employment, enterprise operation, economic development, etc., the Supreme People's Court personally supervised and coordinated the coordinated promotion of the nine courts in the three regions involved in the case. Through close communication and clarification of interests with the local party committee, government, and the superior supervisory department of the debtor, and the comprehensive use of various methods, this case and related litigation and execution cases were ultimately resolved together, achieving a good effect of "executing a case, protecting both parties' enterprises, and promoting the economic development of the two regions". For example, in the execution case of a financial loan contract dispute between a certain bank and a certain hotel, the court publicly auctioned off the hotel involved in the case according to the prescribed procedures. However, the forced evacuation work after the auction of a large hotel is very complicated, especially when the hotel is still in operation, involving a large number of interest groups such as employees, tenants, suppliers, prepaid card consumers, etc. The case is significant and complex. If the interests of all parties cannot be properly handled during the enforcement process, it is easy to cause negative impacts. Faced with this situation, the local high court decided to carry out collaborative execution. After collaborating with multiple parties, detailed execution plans were formulated, evacuation work was implemented step by step, and group conflicts were properly resolved. Finally, the hotel involved in the case was successfully delivered to the buyer smoothly. The "bone cases" and "difficult cases" that are difficult to push forward have been transformed into "real gold and silver" through cross enforcement measures such as promotion and supervision, becoming "demonstration cases" and "boutique cases" for resolving similar disputes. People's courts actively solve enforcement difficulties, closely combine case handling with promoting development, resolving conflicts, maintaining stability, and responding to risks, achieving a vivid practice of political communication and effectiveness in case closure, reflecting the active role of people's courts in upholding justice for the people and fully realizing their rights and interests in winning lawsuits. Judiciary is the last line of defense to maintain fairness and justice. Doing a good job in enforcement is a long and arduous task. When the realization of the rights and interests of the parties involved in the lawsuit is not completed, it can only be carried out in a timely manner. We look forward to the continuous optimization of cross enforcement methods by the people's courts, extracting experience and practices from typical cases, optimizing and implementing enforcement work with "points" and "surfaces", promoting substantive resolution of cases, enabling the people's right to win lawsuits to be realized faster and better, and further enhancing the people's sense of judicial gain. (Lai Xin She)