The first prosecutor's disciplinary case in the country: prosecutors were punished in violation of the law

On July 14, the theme of the Supreme Prosecutor was based on the theme of "Deepening the Reform of the Mechanism of Law Enforcement Judicial Power" and released a typical case of the third batch of national procuratorial reform reform. Red Star reporter noticed that among the 8 typical cases released this time, the first prosecutor's punishment cases were included in the country.

According to reports, since the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, the Supreme People's Procuratorate has formulated and implemented standardized documents such as the "Regulations on Judicial Responsibility for the People's Procuratorate" and "Prosecutor's Punishment Work Procedure (Trial)". In 2020, after review by the Punishment Committee of the Henan Provincial People's Procuratorate, it was successfully handled by the prosecutor's prosecutor's punishment case from the nation's procuratorate.

Regarding the typical significance of the case, the highest prosecution pointed out that the establishment of a prosecutor's punishment system is an inevitable requirement for prosecutors to implement the judicial responsibility system and improve the judicial responsibility system, and promote the prosecutor's fair exercise of procuratorial rights in accordance with the law. The Henan Provincial People's Procuratorate took the opportunity to handle the practice of the first punishment case to give full play to the role of education, warning, prevention, and leading the role of punishment cases, and provided a good reference for promoting this work in various local procuratorial organs.

↑ Some screenshots of "Typical Cases of Procuratorate of the National Procuratorate in 2022"

The third time returned the case back to the public security replenishment

Prosecutors were reported in violation of laws and regulations

The case of the Supreme Procuratorate reported that in 2020, the Henan Provincial People's Procuratorate in the case of "A reply with a reply from the masses" was reported to receive an illegal case in the case of Zhang Moumou's provocation in Luoyang City in Luoyang City. After the report of the question, after a preliminary review, the case of the prosecutor Li Moumou was found to be suspected of violating the procuratorial duties, and he strictly conducted investigations and handling the clue of the problem in accordance with the prosecutor's punishment work procedure.

In May of the same year, the Procuratorate of Henan Province and Luoyang City jointly established a professional team to conduct a judicial investigation of the prosecutor Li Moumou, and organized the first -line prosecutors and criminal procuratorial business experts to repeatedly demonstrate and strictly control the investigation conclusions.

After investigation, in the original case, Li Moumou missed and applied to the relevant legal provisions of the replenishment of supplementary investigations in order to fight for the time for handling the case. In the case of two returns to supplementary investigations before the original case was specified, the third time returned to the public security organs to supplement the supplementary supplementation Investigation, the violation of the Criminal Procedure Law on the "supplementary investigation is limited to the secondary" regulations, causing the case to handle the time limit, and triggers the issue of letters and visits.

↑ Some screenshots of "Typical Cases of Procuratorate of the National Procuratorate in 2022"

The disciplinary committee determined that it is a major negligence

Disciplinary Opinion Opinions: Warning punishment

In the later period, Li Moumou had realized this issue. In order to cover up his own mistakes, when he studied the case at the Prosecutor's Committee of the hospital, he did not report the relevant situation truthfully, which caused the problem to be discovered and dealt with in time. Based on this, the investigation team proposed that "Li Moumou had a violation of procuratorial responsibilities and was a major negligence, and he should bear the corresponding judicial responsibility."

Because Li Moumou made it clear that there was no objection to the facts, evidence and conclusions of the investigation and identification, after reviewing the judicial responsibility investigation materials in accordance with the "Measures", it was issued by the prosecutor of the Provincial Procuratorate and reported to the chairman of the punishment committee. On June 24th, the members of the Disciplinary Committee were submitted to the discussion official letter and investigation materials, and the organization conducted a written review of the judicial responsibility investigation opinions.

After review, 15 of the 17 members of the Prosecutor's Prosecutor's Council of Henan Province believed that "Li Moumou had major faults and should bear corresponding judicial responsibilities." On July 14, the Disciplinary Office of the Disciplinary Committee agreed and issued a review opinion.

On July 15th, in accordance with the review opinions of the Disciplinary Committee and the relevant provisions of the "Measures", Li Moumou was given a warning. Li Moumou expressed the decision to accept the punishment and conducted in -depth inspections.

Through the deterrent warning of this case

Those who are dealt with by the procedure are significantly reduced

According to reports, the Henan Provincial People's Procuratorate insisted on exploring and summarizing the practice of the first disciplinary case. It further optimized the punishment working procedure. Strengthen the promotion of prosecutor's punishment system and carry out in -depth warning education.

In the case, the prosecutor's handling of the case of the case was not improper, which caused a petition for the masses due to the violation of the law. Through this case, the Henan Provincial People's Procuratorate applied for the disciplinary system to identify the procedure illegal behavior and clearly release the signal of "even if the case's entity is fair, but the serious consequences of the procedure should be assumed" Strengthen the procedures and entities with the entity, and do every case with the standards of "seeking extremes" and "stop in the best".

After the handling of this case, the Henan Provincial People's Procuratorate launched the province's third -level procuratorate in a timely manner to promote reform and reform, and urged the province's procuratorial police to further analyze the outstanding problems in the awareness and capacity of the province. The case-comparison of "responsibility awareness, and strive to improve the quality of the case.

Through the deterrent warning of this case, the number of prosecutors who had been dealt with due to the illegal procedure had declined significantly since 2021.

Red Star reporter Gao Xin Beijing report

Intern editor Zhu Jieying

- END -