[Empirical discipline] Persist in seeking truth from facts to strengthen self -supervision

(How to understand and grasp the regulations that make no prosecution decisions or innocent judgments after transferring the regulations?

According to the "Regulations on the Implementation of the Supervision Law of the People's Republic of China" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations"), Article 231, the People's Procuratorate made a decision of non -prosecution or a non -guilty judgment on the case of the case transferred by the supervisory organs, involving the right sentence, involving the right to right If the person who is investigated has the fact that the facts of the government affairs shall be determined, the supervisory organs shall review the decision of government action in accordance with the law and distinguish the situation. For the first time, the procedure department stipulates in the supervision regulations that there are fewer related research and practical cases, and it is necessary to further explore.

Deeply understand the purpose and significance of the review process. In the entire process of supervision and law enforcement and criminal judicial connection, the provisions of Article 231 of the Regulations belong to the typical "post -event connection" scenario, that is, the supervisory organs have made government affairs decisions on suspected crime cases and transferred them to judicial organs to judicial organs Later, due to various subjective or objective reasons, the judicial organs' opinions on the facts of the crime and the supervision organs have changed significantly. In this case, in order to maintain the seriousness and authority of the supervision and law enforcement and criminal judicial work, to maintain the credibility of the state organs, and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the person investigated, the supervisory organs need to review the decision to make the government affairs. Correct the possible problems. From this perspective, the above procedure is an extension of the judicial organs 'restrictions on supervision organs, and it is also the re -supervision of the supervision organs' work on their own work. For the effective judgment and decision made by the judicial organs, the supervisory organs must fully respect, and to examine the shortcomings that may exist in their own work. Those who have problems should be corrected in a timely manner. This is of great significance for improving the weak links of supervision and law enforcement, ensuring the quality of cases, and reducing appeal to appeal.

Based on the independence of the case. The first is to grasp the scope of the review case. For cases that make decisions or innocent judgments made by judicial organs, they do not need to review the decision of government affairs. It depends on whether the opinions of the judicial organs are "involved in the fact that the investigator has taken effect." The "involved" includes not only the substantial impact, but also possible impacts; the "facts" include not only the determination of the facts of the government, but also the nature of the nature of related facts and the application of laws and regulations. In practice, the judicial organs have made decisions or innocent judgments, and there are many legal and discretional situations. It is not considered a crime; the evidence is insufficient, and the crime that does not meet the prosecution conditions or the charges cannot be established. These circumstances may have an impact on the original identification and handling opinions of the supervisory organs. Some are the reasons for the criminal proceedings system. In fact, the judicial organs and the supervisory authority have no substantial differences in the facts and nature of the facts and nature. These circumstances have less impact or no effect on the original identification and processing opinions of the supervisory organs. Therefore, the supervisory organs must be based on cases, and the specific situation is specific to analyze. If the opinions of the judicial organs may affect the facts or nature of government affairs, whether it is sufficient to change the grade of punishment, it is necessary to conduct review. The second is to grasp the method of reviewing cases. The supervision organs' review work is neither a simple repetition of the original trial, nor the "endorsement" of the judicial organs, but its independent method. The supervisory organs shall conduct comprehensive reviews of illegal facts of the case, identification of nature, application of regulations, and grades of punishment based on the evidence of all the evidence stipulated in the Supervision Law, and conduct a comprehensive review of the case of the supervision law and the government affairs. The "all evidence of the case" based on the review of the supervisory organs shall include the newly collected or new evidence collected after the case is transferred to the judicial organs; at the same time, the supervisory organs shall also Exclude according to law. The third is to grasp the criteria for review and processing. When reviewing and proposing handling opinions, the standards that the supervisory organs determine the nature and the standards for processing are not completely consistent with the standards of judicial organs. This is because the object of the supervisory organs is determined by government affairs, the content of the review is illegal facts and their constituent elements. The facts of facts, legal basis, and penalties are different. For example, if the amount of crime has not reached the standards stipulated in the criminal law, although the judicial organs are not identified as a crime, the supervisory organs can still be identified as a job violation, and so on. Therefore, the supervisory organs must adhere to the facts of truthfully, make independent judgments in identification and treatment, and should not be forced to be consistent with the opinions of the judicial organs.

Standardize the performance processing procedures. Generally speaking, after receiving the non -prosecution decision or innocent verdict of the judicial organs, the case of the case review shall be reviewed in a timely manner to meet the prescribed conditions, and the audit work shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures. After review, if the original government action decision determines the fact that the facts are clear and the law is correct, it shall be proposed to no longer change, and the relevant person in charge of the Commission for Discipline Inspection will be approved. If the decision of the original government affairs decision is indeed wrong or improper, it should be proposed to revoke or change in accordance with the law, and referring to the original trial procedure to submit the audit opinion in accordance with the procedure for the disciplinary committee of the Standing Committee of the Discipline Inspection Commission for review; according to the permission of the punishment, the same level needs to be reported to the same level. If the party committee or higher -level party committee and the disciplinary commission are approved, they shall also perform the solicitation procedures and submission procedures; after review and approval, the decision to revoke or change the decision of the original sanctions shall be announced in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Government Affairs Law. (This article was published in the 1222th issue of "China Discipline Inspection and Supervision" magazine, author: Wang Teng, the Case Report Room of the National Commission for Discipline Inspection)

- END -