In the report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized the importance of "implementing the political responsibility of exercising full and strict governance over the Party and making good use of the accountability mechanism." The Third Plenary Session of the 20th Central Commission for Discipline Inspection deployed the effective use of the accountability mechanism, requiring the "improvement of accountability systems and procedures, the strengthening of systems such as the tiered review of accountability for key areas and key issues, and the review of accountability cases, to prevent and correct problems such as weak accountability, generalized accountability, and the pursuit of speed over accuracy." What is the significance of the newly revised "Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Disciplinary Actions" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations") adding provisions on disciplinary actions for abusing accountability or being seriously irresponsible in accountability work? What are the constituent elements of this disciplinary violation? How should the focus of evidence collection be grasped in supervision and discipline enforcement? The "China Discipline Inspection and Supervision News" specially invited discipline inspection and supervision cadres to exchange views.

Invited Guests

Zhang Xuan, Deputy Director of the Case Review Office of the Hunan Provincial Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision

Wang Ruiqiong, Deputy Director of the Case Review Office of the Nanjing Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision, Jiangsu Province

Wen Jianing, Member of the Shuangyashan Municipal Commission of Supervision and Director of the Fourth Supervision and Inspection Office of the Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision, Heilongjiang Province

What are the main manifestations of abusing accountability or being seriously irresponsible in accountability work, and what is the significance of the newly revised "Regulations" adding provisions on disciplinary actions for this disciplinary violation?

Zhang Xuan: Serious and effective accountability helps promote Party organizations at all levels and leading Party cadres to understand, clarify, uphold, and fulfill their responsibilities and take on their responsibilities. However, in practice, some units and localities have problems such as weak accountability, simplification, and generalization, mainly manifested in the following aspects:

First, holding lower-level officials accountable but not higher-level officials. For example, some higher-level units delegate regulatory, supervisory, and law enforcement powers to lower-level governments, especially township governments, on the grounds of insufficient personnel and heavy workload. In this case, lower-level governments perform various tasks deployed by higher-level units, essentially acting on behalf of higher-level units, with decision-making power still residing at the higher level. However, when problems arise, some accountability measures only target lower-level governments and personnel performing specific tasks, without holding higher-level units and relevant leading cadres accountable. This "holding lower-level officials accountable but not higher-level officials" leads to an imbalance between power and responsibility.

Second, unclear boundaries. Regarding the objects of accountability, the accountability regulations have clear provisions, but some localities treat cases involving the pursuit of direct responsibility as accountability cases and also handle cases that do not fall under the accountability regulations using accountability measures, resulting in unclear boundaries and inaccurate nature determination. For example, some cases where unit leaders personally participate in public fund tourism, violating the spirit of the Central Eight-Point Regulations, are also treated as accountability cases, leading to blurred boundaries.

Third, inaccurate grasp. Accountability is a highly political and policy-oriented task that must adhere to the principles of seeking truth from facts and implementing accountability in accordance with regulations and disciplines. However, in practice, some misunderstand and implement the requirement of "quick investigation and quick handling," leading to superficial and unsubstantiated investigations, resulting in simple and crude, forceful, and deliberate exaggeration.

Fourth, non-standard procedures. The accountability regulations have strict provisions on how to initiate and handle accountability procedures. However, some Party organizations and leading cadres engage in subjective speculation, pursuing disciplinary responsibility as soon as accountability is initiated, and immediately demanding results without following the prescribed procedures and requirements, resulting in accountability lacking procedural safeguards.

Fifth, failure to implement rectification. Accountability and rectification are the relationship between means and ends. The purpose of accountability is to spur and inspire Party members and cadres to take on their responsibilities, promote problem-solving, and achieve practical results. However, some reverse the priorities, failing to provide suggestions for improvement after accountability, simply concluding the matter, or even using accountability to replace rectification. For example, some units use the accountability of a few individuals as a way to deal with inspections from higher-level departments, without addressing how to solve the problems or who is responsible for rectification.

Wang Ruiqiong: Accountability is a powerful tool for exercising full and strict governance over the Party. "A thousand exhortations are not as effective as one accountability." "Those with power have responsibilities, those with responsibilities must shoulder them, and those who fail to fulfill their responsibilities must be held accountable." The sharp sword of accountability targets the shortcomings of Party members and cadres shirking responsibility and lacking the will to work, and effective accountability can promote Party organizations at all levels and leading Party cadres to take responsibility, uphold their responsibilities, and fulfill their responsibilities, practicing loyalty, integrity, and dedication. However, abusing accountability or being seriously irresponsible in accountability work not only fails to play the role of accountability in encouraging dedication but also dampens the enthusiasm of Party members and cadres to work and start businesses. The newly revised "Regulations" adds Article 137 in Chapter 10, "Disciplinary Actions for Violations of Work Discipline," specifically providing disciplinary actions for abusing accountability or being seriously irresponsible in accountability work, which has important practical significance.

First, it achieves the integration and connection of intra-Party regulations. Article 21, paragraph 2, of the Accountability Regulations stipulates that if Party organizations or leading Party cadres abuse accountability or are seriously irresponsible in accountability work, causing adverse effects, their responsibilities should be seriously investigated. Article 137 of the "Regulations" further clarifies at the Party discipline level how to investigate responsibility and what kind of responsibility to investigate.

Second, it reflects the requirements for accurate and standardized accountability. In practice, in addition to weak accountability and failure to hold those who should be held accountable, there are also phenomena of generalized accountability and serious irresponsibility. For example, some engage in "making up the numbers" accountability, generalizing and expanding accountability; some engage in "selective" accountability, holding lower-level officials accountable but not higher-level officials, holding small officials accountable but not big officials; some do not distinguish specific responsibilities and engage in a "one-size-fits-all" approach in accountability. Regulating disciplinary violations in accountability work helps improve the standardization and accuracy of accountability work and urges every accountability case to strictly comply with regulations, disciplines, and laws, withstanding scrutiny.

Third, it reflects the supervision and restraint of accountability power. The "Regulations" describe this disciplinary violation as including both the results of abusing accountability or being seriously irresponsible in accountability work and the improper process of accountability, reflecting the supervision and restraint of accountability power from procedure to substance.

What are the constituent elements of abusing accountability or being seriously irresponsible in accountability work? How should the focus of evidence collection be grasped in supervision and discipline enforcement?

Wang Ruiqiong: The constituent elements of abusing accountability or being seriously irresponsible in accountability work are as follows:

Subject of violation. The subject of this disciplinary violation should be relevant personnel of the unit with the power to hold accountable. According to the Accountability Regulations, the subjects of intra-Party accountability include Party committees (Party groups), discipline inspection commissions and their dispatched (sent) institutions, and Party work organs. From a procedural perspective, accountability includes initiating accountability, investigating accountability, making accountability decisions, and implementing accountability decisions. Relevant personnel involved in these stages may be the subjects of this disciplinary violation. Relevant personnel include those directly responsible and those with leadership responsibilities. It is worth noting that Article 39 of the newly revised "Regulations" modifies the standard for defining the scope of "major leadership responsibility" from "work directly supervised" to "work supervised," removing the word "directly." This means that responsibility is not simply distinguished based on position but based on actual power and responsibility.

Object of violation. The object infringed upon by abusing accountability or being seriously irresponsible in accountability work is the seriousness and fairness of accountability work, and the trust of cadres and the masses in accountability work.

Subjective aspects. The subjective aspect of abuse of accountability is intentional, including direct intention and indirect intention. The subjective aspect of serious irresponsibility in accountability work can be indirect intention, that is, knowing that one's seriously irresponsible behavior may lead to inaccurate and irregular accountability, causing adverse effects, but still allowing the result to occur; it can also be negligence, that is, due to carelessness or overconfidence, leading to inaccurate and irregular accountability.

Objective aspects. The objective aspect is manifested in exceeding one's authority in accountability work, making decisions in violation of regulations, and handling matters that one has no authority to decide or handle, or being seriously irresponsible in accountability work, causing adverse effects. For example, there are facts such as "the facts of accountability are unclear, the evidence is not conclusive, the basis is insufficient, the responsibility is unclear, the procedures are not compliant, the handling is inappropriate, or there are other situations that should not be held accountable or inaccurate accountability" as stipulated in the first paragraph of Article 21 of the Accountability Regulations. Taking inappropriate handling as an example, the accountability methods stipulated in the Accountability Regulations include three accountability methods for Party organizations and four accountability methods for leading Party cadres. Inappropriate handling not only includes abusing disciplinary measures for accountability, but also includes abusing non-disciplinary accountability methods such as announcements, warnings, organizational adjustments, or organizational handling.

Wen Jianing: Focusing on the constitution of disciplinary violations related to this clause, determining the key points of evidence collection, and further standardizing the collection, review, and determination of evidence for such cases, the following evidence must be collected and reviewed in practice:

First, the subject identity of the person being reviewed. It should be ascertained whether the person being reviewed is a staff member of a Party organization with the power of accountability and their scope of power and responsibilities. For example, documentary evidence proving the subject's identity generally includes the Party organization's work responsibilities, the appointment and removal documents of directly responsible persons and leaders, cadre appointment and removal approval forms, proof of division of responsibilities, etc.; verbal evidence from directly responsible persons, leaders, personnel from the organization department of the Party organization, etc., to prove the subject's identity and their power and responsibilities, whether they have the power and responsibilities of accountability, etc., to prove whether they carried out accountability in accordance with management authority.

Second, evidence proving the objective act of disciplinary violation. It should be ascertained whether the Party organization, directly responsible persons, and leaders exceeded their authority, failed to handle matters according to their authority, or were seriously irresponsible, their misconduct in accountability work, the specific process, and the adverse effects caused. For example, statements and defenses of directly responsible persons and leaders in the Party organization that made the accountability decision, testimony from the accountability object and relevant personnel of the accountable unit, etc., verbal evidence to prove the disciplinary violation of the person being reviewed in accountability work; written materials made by the person being reviewed in accountability work, including transcripts, relevant documentary evidence of inspection and examination, processing suggestions and opinions, relevant laws, regulations, or industry standards, etc., to corroborate whether the person being reviewed exceeded their authority and what kind of authority they exceeded, whether it was a procedural violation or a substantive issue, etc., to evaluate whether the person being reviewed abused accountability or was derelict in their duties.

Third, the subjective aspect of the person being reviewed. Through the statements and defenses of the person being reviewed, it should be proved whether their mentality in accountability work was intentional or negligent. At the same time, corroborate with other evidence, such as obtaining documentary evidence that reflects the discussion process, such as meeting minutes, to indirectly prove the subjective aspect of the person being reviewed; obtaining testimony from other personnel involved in accountability work and the accountability object to verify the subjective mentality of the person being reviewed. For example, if the accountability object raises reasonable grounds for defense during the accountability process, but the person being reviewed does not verify it and hastily holds them accountable, it can indirectly prove that the person being reviewed intentionally knew about it.

In addition, relevant appraisal opinions, audio-visual materials, and electronic data reflecting the accountability process can be collected as needed.

How can Party organizations and leading Party cadres better shoulder the responsibility of comprehensively and strictly governing the Party, adhere to the basic principles in accountability work, and accurately distinguish responsibilities?

Wen Jianing: The principles of accountability work are the implementation and concretization of the guiding ideology and overall requirements for carrying out accountability work. The Accountability Regulations stipulate six principles that Party accountability work should adhere to. The six principles are closely related and interconnected, and should be accurately grasped in practice.

First, compliance with regulations and discipline, and being true to facts. This is the basic premise for carrying out accountability work. The accountability entity must strictly regulate its own exercise of power, adhere to facts as the basis, and adhere to the Party Constitution, other intra-Party regulations, and national laws and regulations as the yardstick to carry out accountability work in accordance with regulations, discipline, and law.

Second, accountability for dereliction of duty, and strict accountability. Accountability is a sharp tool for governing the Party. It must adhere to a strict tone, and for those who have neglected their duties, it must insist on taking serious action, dare to hold them accountable, and be good at holding them accountable, establishing the rigidity of the system.

Third, consistency of power and responsibility, and commensurate accountability. General Secretary Xi Jinping has repeatedly emphasized that those with power must bear responsibility, those with responsibility must take responsibility, and those who fail to fulfill their responsibilities must be held accountable. In practice, accountability must grasp the consistency of power and responsibility, and according to the facts of accountability, reasonably determine the scope and level of accountability, ascertain the responsibilities, dereliction of duty, and the causal relationship between them and the facts of accountability to determine the extent of responsibility. Comprehensive consideration should be given to factors such as motives, objective conditions, nature and harm, attitude towards admitting mistakes, consistent performance, and recovery of losses to distinguish different situations and make accurate accountability decisions.

Fourth, combining strict management with care and concern, and balancing incentives and constraints. The purpose of accountability is to urge Party organizations and leading Party cadres to strengthen their sense of responsibility and encourage them to take responsibility through accountability. In practice, it is necessary to achieve a balance between leniency and strictness, implement the "three distinctions," and prevent inappropriate accountability from dampening the enthusiasm of cadres to work.

Fifth, correcting mistakes and educating people. Through strengthening accountability, leading cadres truly shoulder their responsibilities and do not make mistakes or make fewer mistakes in the future. This is the greatest care and protection that the Party organization can give to leading cadres. In accountability work, ideological and political work should be done, focusing on education and guidance, not only to make the accountability object aware and educated, but also to sound the alarm for other Party organizations and leading Party cadres, achieving the maximum effect of accountability.

Sixth, collective decision-making and clear responsibility. In carrying out accountability work, it should be decided through collective discussion according to procedures to prevent individual decisions and hasty accountability. Distinguishing responsibilities means, firstly, distinguishing between accountability and holding accountable. Holding accountable is holding directly responsible persons accountable, while accountability is holding the main body, supervisory, and leadership responsible, and the two should not be confused; secondly, clarifying the division of responsibilities, distinguishing the responsibilities among members of the leadership team, clarifying the responsibilities of the Party organization and the individual responsibilities of leading cadres, and paying attention to the responsibilities between upper and lower Party organizations and their leadership team members to prevent pushing responsibility downwards.

Zhang Xuan: In accountability work, accurately distinguishing responsibilities requires accurately distinguishing between the objects of holding accountable and the objects of accountability. The "Regulations" divides the responsibilities of personnel related to disciplinary violations into direct responsibility, main leadership responsibility, and important leadership responsibility. The Accountability Regulations stipulate that accountability is about the main responsibility, supervisory responsibility, and leadership responsibility of Party organizations and leading Party cadres who have neglected their duties. In practice, it is necessary to clarify the relationship between holding accountable and accountability, pay attention to distinguishing between the objects of holding accountable and the objects of accountability, and avoid equating holding directly responsible persons accountable with accountability to ensure the accuracy and seriousness of accountability work.

Second, accurately distinguish between collective and individual responsibilities. For issues such as improper collective decision-making, the leadership team bears overall leadership responsibility, the main leader of the leadership team and the directly responsible team members bear the primary leadership responsibility, and other team members involved in decision-making and work bear important leadership responsibilities. When holding a Party organization accountable, the leadership team members responsible for that Party organization should also be held accountable. In practice, it is necessary to distinguish between collective and individual responsibilities, to prevent collective responsibility from replacing individual responsibility, and to avoid only holding collective responsibility accountable without holding individual responsibility accountable.

Third, accurately distinguish between primary leadership responsibility and important leadership responsibility. Primary leadership responsibility refers to the direct leadership responsibility of leading cadres within their scope of responsibilities for failing to perform or improperly performing their duties in charge of work, and for the resulting losses or consequences; among them, the main leader of the leadership team and the directly responsible team members bear the primary leadership responsibility within their scope of responsibilities; important leadership responsibility refers to the secondary leadership responsibility of leading cadres within their scope of responsibilities for failing to perform or improperly performing their duties in the process of participating in decision-making and work; among them, "participating in decision-making and work" refers to participating in collective discussions or the implementation of relevant work according to the division of responsibilities, but not within the scope of direct work. In practice, when holding the "top leader" accountable, it is necessary to prevent important leadership responsibility from replacing primary leadership responsibility, and to avoid accountability imbalances.

Fourth, accurately distinguish between the responsibilities of the superior competent authority and the responsibilities of local administration. Correctly handle the relationship between the superior competent authority's "who supervises, who is responsible" and the local "local administration, tiered responsibility", clarify the responsibilities and powers of both, distinguish the severity of responsibilities, adhere to the facts, eliminate the practice of replacing "superior competent authority responsibility" with "local administration", and resolutely correct the wrong tendency of only holding the grassroots accountable without holding the superior competent authority accountable.

Fifth, accurately distinguish between dereliction of duty and work errors that occur in pilot programs. The Accountability Regulations require strict implementation of the "three distinctions", stipulating circumstances where accountability is not imposed or is exempted, creating a good atmosphere for cadres to dare to take responsibility and be innovative. In practice, in implementing the "three distinctions", it is necessary to avoid directly equating work errors that occur in pilot programs with dereliction of duty.

How to strictly follow regulations, discipline, and law to further promote standardized and precise accountability?

Zhang Xuan: Promoting standardized and precise accountability requires the following work from a practical operational perspective.

First, raise the political standing. Some Party and government leading cadres do not have a high political standing, failing to recognize the harm caused to the Party's cause and the damage to the interests of the people by dereliction of duty, fearing that accountability will "tarnish" the local area, abandoning their primary responsibilities and supervisory responsibilities, and leaving accountability at the slogan level, resulting in a discount in the enforcement of the accountability system. In response to these erroneous thoughts and actions, we must always handle and investigate them politically. Accountability primarily concerns the political responsibility of governing the Party, strictly enforcing political discipline and political rules, consolidating the primary responsibility for governing the Party, strengthening organizational leadership, implementing responsibilities at all levels, strictly implementing "dual responsibility", and ensuring that accountability does not lose focus or deviate.

Second, highlight the effectiveness of accountability. Be objective and factual. Treat issues of dereliction of duty according to their nature, and deal with them accordingly; do not engage in subjective attribution. Adhere to the principle of consistent rights and responsibilities, scientifically determine issues of dereliction of duty based on the responsibilities of Party organizations and leading cadres, distinguish different situations, be strict when necessary, and be lenient when appropriate, preventing a "one-size-fits-all" approach. Strictly implement the relevant provisions on the accountability impact period, preventing problems such as illegal use or promotion during the impact period. Do a good job in the "second half" of accountability, implementing the requirements of using cases to promote reform, focusing on the main line of responsibility implementation, deeply analyzing the causes of problems, issuing disciplinary inspection and supervision suggestions in a timely manner, identifying responsibility points, accurately exerting efforts to correct deviations, opening up channels to transform the pressure of accountability into the motivation to perform duties, and achieving both immediate and long-term solutions.

Third, combine punishment with education. Accurately apply accountability methods; do not mention disciplinary sanctions every time accountability is mentioned. Adhere to the integration of discipline, law, emotion, and reason, reflecting both the seriousness and strength of discipline and law, and fully demonstrating the organization's care and warmth, ensuring that the accountable party is convinced, and ensuring that accountability achieves good political, disciplinary, and social effects. For different types of problems, consider them from political, disciplinary, legal, and social perspectives, truly achieving the effect of warning a large number of people by holding one person accountable. Establish and improve post-accountability guarantee mechanisms, actively explore the establishment of systems for accountability implementation, using cases to promote reform and governance, and follow-up visits to accountable personnel, encouraging accountable personnel to put down their burdens.

Fourth, standardize accountability procedures. Strictly implement the procedures and powers stipulated in the Party Constitution and relevant Party regulations. Strengthen the management and supervision of the entire process of accountability initiation, investigation, reporting, approval, and implementation, adhere to collective discussions, and effectively protect the rights of the parties involved, including their right to know, right to defense, and right to appeal.

Fifth, combine strict management with care and concern. "Combining strict management with care and concern, and balancing incentives and constraints" is a consistent requirement of the Party Central Committee, reflecting the Party organization's care and concern for cadres, and the two are an organically unified whole. On the one hand, we must adhere to a strict tone, releasing a signal that things will become stricter in the future in accountability work, reminding Party organizations and leading cadres to strictly perform their duties in accordance with their responsibilities, and strictly enforcing the responsibility of governing the Party; on the other hand, we must enhance the confidence of Party members and cadres in undertaking their work, focusing on solving the problems that affect Party members and cadres in undertaking their work, taking targeted measures, and enhancing the sense of identity and confidence of Party members and cadres in undertaking their work.

Sixth, strengthen supervision of accountability work. Correctly understand the original intention of the accountability system design, overcome erroneous ideas such as the greater the scope of accountability, the higher the level of accountability, and the heavier the punishment, the more effective the work, avoid "accompanying" and "rotating" accountability, and effectively protect the relevant rights of the accountable party. Relevant departments should establish a dynamic supervision mechanism for accountability work to effectively protect the relevant rights of the parties involved. Conduct a "review" of accountability cases, verifying whether the evidence is sufficient, whether the qualification is accurate, whether the division of responsibilities is scientific, and whether the handling is appropriate, promptly identifying problems, promoting rectification, improving the standardization and precision of accountability work, and establishing a responsibility accountability mechanism for abuse of accountability power and serious irresponsibility, urging relevant Party organizations to more consciously follow regulations, and conduct precise accountability. (Reporter Liu Yilin)

Editor in charge: Xing Tingting, Jiang Yongbin

Chief platform editor: Zhai Yu