Chapter 46 Chapter 44 Official Accountability Urgently Needs System Breakthrough

The official accountability system in our country is still in the extensive stage. It is not enough to improve administrative accountability only technically. The key is to move from administrative accountability to procedural accountability. Liu Jiayi, chief auditor of the National Audit Office, once talked about the phenomenon of "repeated investigations and repeated crimes" in audited institutions in the past, and pointed out: "This kind of problem is not an isolated case, it has a certain commonality, and it is a systemic problem." Liu Jiayi's predecessor, Li Jinhua, became famous for setting off "audit storms" many times.Back then, "repeated investigations and repeated offenses" was a much-maligned issue.The reporter learned that after the "audit storm" in the past, some departments that were found to have problems had "repeated offenses", but most of the officials in these departments failed to bear the corresponding responsibilities, and some were officials in other places, and were even arrested. promoted.

In recent years, in my country's administrative accountability, a similar phenomenon is more common.Except for a few officials who were held accountable for major accidents, very few officials were held accountable for mistakes in decision-making, or violations in terms of style, morality, and discipline. pursue. "Our country does not have a completely unified standard for official accountability, and the implementation process is extremely arbitrary." Professor Li Chengyan, a doctoral supervisor at the School of Government Administration of Peking University, said in an interview with reporters, "The serious consequences of the lack of rigid accountability for officials However, not only can it not form a deterrent to officials, but it is also easy to indulge the fluke mentality of officials abusing power, causing great damage to the government's execution and credibility."

At 12:46 on January 5, 2009, with a loud bang, the "Three Gorges Pearl Sightseeing Tower" with a total design investment of more than 35 million yuan, a height of 135 meters and a construction area of ​​more than 5,000 square meters came to an end... It is understood that this sightseeing tower was invested and built by the Management Committee of Longbao Immigrant Development Zone, Wanzhou District, Chongqing in March 2004.Until the project was stopped on April 17, 2005, the preliminary project cost more than 10 million yuan.According to the official public explanation, because the project does not make money, no merchant is willing to take over.After research, the district decided to demolish it.

An image project that cost taxpayers tens of millions of yuan was wiped out in an instant, and the public thought that someone would be held responsible.But two months have passed, and the public has not seen any official stand up and take responsibility. On November 26, 2008, Xiong Chuanming, who was directly responsible for the "best official villas in history", was removed from the post of party secretary and director of the Xinyang City Land and Resources Bureau by the Supervision Department of the Henan Provincial Commission for Discipline Inspection and the Xinyang Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision Bureau, and he was punished. Serious punishment within the party.

Previously, Xiong Chuanming received an "administrative warning".This was considered by the public to be too "understated".Under the pressure of public opinion, Xiong Chuanming finally "sacked the horse", which can be regarded as an explanation to public opinion. "It can be said that Xiong Chuanming's administrative warning to dismissal is the result of the accountability game between officials and the people." Li Chengyan commented on this, "Such official accountability feels like bargaining in the market-the government is like a seller, and the public is like a buyer. Once an official accident arouses public anger, in order to maintain the credibility of the government itself, the government will tentatively hold the officials accountable, and hope that the public will actively accept the account. If the public accepts it, the transaction will succeed. .”

The reporter's investigation found that due to the lack of rigid accountability system in our country, the accountability of some problematic officials is easily "kidnapped" by the effect of public opinion. status. In recent years, my country has accelerated the process of building an accountability system from the central government to the local government.However, the reporter learned that at present, accountability of officials is mostly limited to the occurrence of major accidents, or the extremely bad social impact caused by violations of regulations, before the accountability procedures are initiated for the officials involved.

"In work, when officials make serious mistakes or violate various regulations, they take the initiative to take moral responsibility through public review, apology, resignation, etc., which is a manifestation of conscious compliance with political ethics." Professor Qi Shanhong, a doctoral supervisor at Nankai University, accepted During the interview, the reporter said, "As long as officials violate the generally accepted moral norms, they will be held accountable, such as officials refusing to save or committing crimes, officials taking mistresses, gambling, and corrupt practices."

Professor Mao Shoulong, a doctoral supervisor at Renmin University of China, believes that there are four levels of responsibility for officials: one is to assume moral responsibility, to be responsible to the victims and the public; the second is to assume political responsibility, that is, to be responsible to the party and the government; It is to assume the responsibility of democracy, to be responsible to the people's representatives and voters who elect one's own; the fourth is to assume the responsibility of the law, to be responsible to the relevant laws and regulations, to see if there is any dereliction of duty.

"In a sense, moral responsibility is the first responsibility of officials. The accountability of officials needs to start with moral responsibility." Li Chengyan believes that "the current accountability system is mainly limited to accountability for violations of laws and party discipline and government discipline, and lacks accountability for power. The political and moral accountability of the operator. This requires the relevant departments to continuously increase the binding force on officials, change the way of accountability, deepen the object of accountability, and expand the scope and field of accountability."

"my country's current accountability methods are relatively single-subject. International experience shows that effective accountability of officials requires the diversification of accountability subjects, and requires the participation of legislatures, news media, social organizations, and the public in accountability." Professor Gong Weibin of the National School of Administration accepted The reporter said in an interview, “With the popularization of the Internet and the strengthening of supervision by news media and public opinion, public participation in accountability of officials is increasing, which promotes the investigation of incidents and the accountability of officials who have neglected their duties. However, On the whole, the current accountability system is still more of a top-down accountability within the party organization and administrative system, and the breadth and depth of the participation of the legislature, social organizations, and the public in accountability is not enough."

"For a long time, my country's governance has basically relied on the introduction of red-headed documents. In the actual implementation, it is difficult to implement a responsibility to every specific level through regulations or laws." Professor Zhang Xixian of the Party Construction Department of the Central Party School believes, "Because there is no With a clear rule of power and responsibility in the legal system, once something goes wrong, no specific responsible person can be found, and there is no clear regulation on which level of cadres should bear how much responsibility, and it is all determined by the higher-level party and government organs.” "Because the accountability of Chinese officials is mostly directed at the grassroots and lower-level officials, no one will resign voluntarily when something goes wrong, and the officials who have problems are also sure that their superiors will protect themselves, so accountability cannot achieve real results." Qi Shanhong said, "In order to deal with public opinion and the higher-level government, the organs responsible for accountability usually throw out some low-level officials. Such an unreasonable responsibility-taking mechanism has created a culture of irresponsibility in officialdom." "Generally, the highest administrative leaders at all levels determine whether to be held accountable, how strong it is, and what kind of people should take what kind of responsibility." Mao Shoulong believes, "If the leaders pay attention to it, accountability will come into practice, and its strength will be great. Once When leaders have other considerations, accountability takes a backseat, diminishes, and sometimes ceases to function. These characteristics of executive accountability make accountability practices often volatile and contentious.” In view of the shortcomings in the accountability of officials, the interviewed experts believe that we should focus on setting up the scope and method of the accountability system, and organically link the country's current multiple accountability system chains to make the official accountability system more systematic and operability. "Our country's official accountability system is still in the extensive stage. To solve this problem, it is not enough to improve administrative accountability only technically. The key is to move from administrative accountability to procedural accountability." Li Chengyan believes that "by investigating The responsibilities that officials should really bear, urge officials to exercise their power legally and legitimately, and make administrative organs and civil servants truly take responsibility. The accountability of officials should be scientific and legalized, who should be responsible, and to what extent There must be a quantitative and specific standard.” "Our country's official accountability system needs to be combined with job analysis, discipline inspection and supervision, auditing, etc., and it must be combined with performance evaluation to improve relevant laws and regulations, so as to achieve standardized accountability, legal accountability, and scientific accountability. First, it must be scientifically established. Second, we must formulate and implement standardized and detailed accountability procedures." Gong Weibin believes that "the accountability system must also be combined with performance evaluation. Performance evaluation is the premise and basis for implementing the accountability system. With the results of performance evaluation, there is a reliable basis for official accountability. At the same time, to combine official accountability with responsibility evaluation, one must scientifically assess the severity of accidents or incident consequences, and second, scientifically assess the relevant leading cadres. The responsibility that should be borne. It is also necessary to prevent simple political accountability, ignoring the analysis and research of the real cause, and losing the opportunity to improve work by finding out the cause and making inferences." "We should establish the constitution, laws and socialist moral principles as the purpose of the accountability system as soon as possible, implement the principle that power comes with responsibility, and that accountability and responsibility are commensurate." accountability system to make up for gaps or deficiencies in disciplinary and legal investigations. Moral accountability is the premise and foundation, and it is also a quick response to accountability. At the same time, improve accountability methods and operations such as review, apology, resignation, and dismissal It is clear that the political and moral accountability procedures will be initiated immediately after the incident occurs.” "Under my country's current political system, it is not enough to only emphasize administrative accountability." Yin Yungong, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told reporters, "Because accountability is the responsibility for the operation of public power, the scope should include all government agencies and units that hold public power. , such as party and government organs, judicial organs, and leading cadres of public utility management units.” "At present, various normative documents such as my country's Civil Servant Law and the Regulations on Disciplining Civil Servants of Administrative Agencies have stipulated the punishment methods, punishment authority and procedures for various officials' violations of discipline." Du Liyuan, a lawyer from Beijing Zhongsheng Law Firm, was interviewed by reporters. It is pointed out that "before more complete regulations are issued, it is necessary to effectively strengthen the implementation of existing rules. The National People's Congress should give full play to its supervisory role in the accountability of officials. At the same time, it should fully guarantee the accountability of officials from the bottom up. Supervision by the masses and public opinion supervision by the news media.”