De­tails about of­fi­cials

China Daily (Canada) - - COMMENT -

The Cen­tral Com­mis­sion for Dis­ci­pline In­spec­tion of the Com­mu­nist Party of China re­cently made pub­lic 10 typ­i­cal cases in­volv­ing vi­o­la­tions of reg­u­la­tions and mea­sures aimed at pro­mot­ing fru­gal­ity and check­ing ex­trav­a­gance, and ex­tended dis­ci­plinary or ad­min­is­tra­tive pun­ish­ments to sev­eral vi­o­la­tors, in­clud­ing Fu Xiaoguang, a se­nior of­fi­cial in Hei­longjiang prov­ince.

Com­pared with sim­i­lar ear­lier dis­clo­sures by the top anti-cor­rup­tion watch­dog, more cases were made pub­lic on this oc­ca­sion and for the first time the of­fend­ers were named. This at­tests to the au­thor­i­ties’ de­ter­mi­na­tion to get rid of long-con­tro­ver­sial mal­prac­tices and in­cor­rect work­ing styles among some of­fi­cials, a China Busi­ness News ed­i­to­rial said on Wed­nes­day.

A month ago, Fu, along with other of­fi­cials, was crit­i­cized by the Hei­longjiang pro­vin­cial au­thor­i­ties, but he was not men­tioned by name. Some me­dia ex­pressed dis­sat­is­fac­tion with this, say­ing that crit­i­cism and over­sight should not be re­duced to a kind of for­mal­ism.

The top anti-graft watch­dog’s named dis­clo­sures are a timely re­sponse to pub­lic opin­ion and should be ap­plauded. But aside from such a praise­wor­thy prac­tice, the au­thor­i­ties should also pluck up the courage to elim­i­nate other long-re­viled of­fi­cial mal­prac­tices, such as ir­reg­u­lar­i­ties in the ap­point­ment of of­fi­cials and the re­in­stat­ing or re­as­sign­ing of de­moted ones.

There is a guide­line in place on the ac­count­abil­ity of lead­ing Party and gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials, but some loop­holes and a lack of de­tails have al­lowed of­fi­cials who were re­moved for mal­prac­tices to re­turn to of­fice. This prac­tice se­ri­ously com­pro­mises the gov­ern­ment’s cred­i­bil­ity. Clearly a fully trans­par­ent in­for­ma­tion sys­tem cov­er­ing of­fi­cials’ ap­point­ments, de­mo­tions and reassignments needs to be swiftly es­tab­lished.

In­for­ma­tion on the of­fi­cial ap­point­ments of some lead­ing of­fi­cials’ chil­dren and rel­a­tives should also be made pub­lic to elim­i­nate the mal­prac­tice of posts be­ing spe­cially cre­ated for the chil­dren of lo­cal lead­ing of­fi­cials, which has re­peat­edly come to light in re­cent years. Open­ness and trans­parency will help in­crease pub­lic over­sight and en­hance the cred­i­bil­ity of the gov­ern­ment.

When it comes to the dis­clo­sure of of­fi­cials’ preap­point­ment in­for­ma­tion, more de­tails, in­clud­ing their past per­for­mance and pro­fes­sional ca­pa­bil­i­ties, as well as their per­sonal ethics, should be made pub­lic, to fa­cil­i­tate pub­lic over­sight and squeeze the space avail­able for prob­lem­atic of­fi­cials to be pro­moted.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from China

© PressReader. All rights reserved.