Key Benefits:
(It was considered at the 132th ordinary meeting of the Government of the Shanghai City on 15 January 2007 for the adoption of Decree No. 68 of 20 January 2007 on the People's Government Order No. 68 of the Shanghai City on 1 March 2007) Chapter I General Article 1 In order to ensure the proper, timely and impartial implementation of administrative law enforcement by the staff of the executive branch, to monitor their duties under the law, to promote the administration of justice in accordance with the relevant laws, regulations and regulations, such as the National People's Republic of China's Administrative Monitoring Act, the Civil Service Act of the People's Republic of China, to develop this approach in conjunction with this city. Article 2 This approach applies to accountability and oversight activities for staff members of executive organs at all levels of the city. Article 3 (Definition) The administrative error described in this approach refers to administrative responsibilities that should be assumed by direct responsibilities and direct supervisors in the course of administrative law enforcement due to the wilful or negligence of the staff, failure to perform or failure to properly perform the statutory duties. Article IV The Shanghai City Monitoring Committee is responsible for the implementation of this approach; the district, district monitoring authorities are responsible for the implementation of this approach within the jurisdiction, in accordance with the terms of personnel management. The relevant oversight and management are carried out at all levels of the city, in accordance with the statutory responsibilities and the provisions of this approach. Article 5 Administrative law enforcement has been held accountable and should uphold the principles of realism, accountability, education and corrections. Chapter II Scope of accountability for administrative law enforcement Article 6 In implementing the following administrative law enforcement acts, administrative law enforcement should be held accountable for the misperceptions of staff resulting from the consequences or adverse effects: (i) Administrative penalties, administrative licences, administrative enforcement, administrative charges, administrative decisions, administrative recognition, administrative payments, administrative inspections, etc.; (ii) Other administrative law enforcement acts under laws, regulations and regulations. Article 7 Article 3 of this approach states that “No statutory responsibility is performed”, including the following: (i) Non-compliance with oversight responsibilities such as inspection, testing, testing and quarantine; (ii) Subject to the application of the administrative act, and after the application of the relative administrative officer, the performance of the duties of the licence and payment shall not be carried out in accordance with the provisions; (iii) After receipt of complaints, reports, complaints, complaints, complaints, prosecution and prosecution by citizens, legal persons or other organizations, the performance of duties such as investigation, treatment shall not be carried out in accordance with the provisions; (iv) Other cases where the law, regulations and regulations do not perform the statutory duties. Article 8 Article 3 of this approach states that “[t]here to the statutory duties”, including the following: (i) The fact that it is not true; (ii) The application of error; (iii) Violations of statutory procedures; (iv) go beyond or abuse of authority; (v) Administrative law enforcement is clearly inappropriate; (vi) Other circumstances under laws, regulations and regulations that are not in the right performance of the statutory duties. Chapter III Article 9 Administrative law enforcement was erroneous and was assumed by direct responsibilities and direct supervisors (hereinafter referred to as the responsibilities for administrative law enforcement). Those directly responsible are the specific custodian of administrative law enforcement matters. Direct supervisors refer to reviewers and approvals of administrative law enforcement matters. The above-mentioned reviewers, including heads of bodies within the executive branch, heads of sub-offices, and other reviewers mandated to exercise their functions; the rator, including the executive heads that issued administrative decisions, as well as other authorized persons authorized to exercise their authorization. Article 10 The changes in the reviewor or the correct opinion of the failure to adopt the custodian, changes in the approval of the author or the correct opinion of the non-application of the licensor resulted in a misperformance of administrative law, which was assumed by the registrar and the rator, with the exception of the provisions of the law, legislation and regulations. As a result of the failure of the custodian, the reviewor, or the concealment of the real situation, has resulted in a misperception of administrative law enforcement, with the responsibility of the custodian, the reviewor. Article 11 The changes in the executive organs of the superior executive branch, the withdrawal of administrative acts by the lower executive branch, have resulted in a misperception of administrative law enforcement and the corresponding responsibilities of the supervisor, reviewor and approval of the executive branch. Article 12 (Responsibility of collective decisions) The decision taken by the executive branch after leading the collective decision-making process led to a misperception of administrative law enforcement, and the main leadership involved in the decision-making process was deemed to be the rator, with the responsibility of the direct supervisor. Chapter IV Article 13 (Percentage of responsibility) The responsible for administrative law enforcement should be given administrative disposal or administrative treatment. Administrative disposal is divided into warnings, lapses, rainfall, removal and dismissal. Administrative treatment is divided into: outpost training, redeployment of law enforcement positions and removal of law enforcement qualifications. Administrative disposal and administrative treatment may be consolidated as appropriate. Article 14. The administrative disposition of those responsible for administrative law enforcement should be made in accordance with the law in the light of circumstances such as intentional or fault, the consequences and the size of the impact: (i) In the light of the circumstances, warning of the disposition; (ii) In the light of the gravity of the circumstances, giving them over, overweight or downgrading; (iii) In the event of serious circumstances, the dismissal or dismissal. Article 15 Administrative law enforcement erroneously leads to misappropriation of administrative law, which can proactively eliminate or mitigate the consequences and adverse impacts of the harm, can be erroneous or mitigated to accountability for administrative law enforcement, and, in minor circumstances, criticized post-education, can be exempted from accountability for administrative law enforcement. Article 16 The responsibilities of administrative law enforcement cannot be promoted at the level of office and level during administrative disposal, which are recorded, overweighted, degradable and removed from service, without the promotion of the salary file. Administrative law enforcement eruple has been disposed of by the removal of the responsible person and, according to the provisions, lower levels. Article 17 Due to the mismanagement of administrative law, the State's liability should also be borne by the executive branch in accordance with the relevant provisions of the National Compensation Act of the People's Republic of China, to the appropriate administrative law enforcement erroneous portion or all compensation costs. Chapter V Accountability for administrative law enforcement Article 18 In one of the following cases, the executive branch considers that there is a need for accountability for the administrative error of the staff of the organ and that the person concerned may be administratively disposed of or administratively in accordance with the law, in the light of the circumstances; and considers that the need to be addressed by the inspector should be transferred to the competent inspection body: (i) Removal, change and re-establishing specific administrative actions by the judiciary, which are in force, shall be carried out to confirm that specific administrative acts are in breach of the law; (ii) Removal, change and re-establishing specific administrative acts, by a review of which the administrative review body has entered into force, to establish compliance with specific administrative acts; (iii) Accreditation and other administrative bodies have confirmed, in accordance with the law, that administrative law enforcement acts are in breach of the law or that they recommend administrative disposition; (iv) Other violations were found. Article 19 In the case of article 18, subparagraph (i), subparagraph (ii), subparagraph (iii), the relevant instruments, such as judgements, decisions, are copied by the judiciary, the executive review body and the relevant administrative bodies. Article 20 (Preliminary review) Upon receipt of the relevant instruments, such as the judiciary, the executive review body and the relevant administrative organs, the decision may, in accordance with the need for the transfer of material, information and preliminary review by the law to determine whether the custodian, the reviewor, the rator and the rator should assume responsibility for administrative law enforcement. Article 21 In the light of the preliminary review, the inspection body considered that there was a need for accountability for administrative law enforcement and should be prosecuted, investigated and tried in accordance with the law. Article 2 (Acknowledgement decision and communication with inspection recommendations) Upon trial by the inspection body, inspection decisions or inspection recommendations should be made in accordance with the relevant provisions of the national and present approach. Monitoring decisions, inspection recommendations should be sent in writing to the relevant executive organs and associated personnel. Article 23 (Migation decisions and briefings with inspection recommendations) The executive organs concerned shall, in accordance with the inspection decision, carry out administrative dispositions by law against the responsible administrative law enforcement errants or, according to the inspection recommendation, be administratively disposed of by the responsible administrative law enforcement officers by law and within thirty days of receipt of inspection decisions or inspection recommendations. Article 24 (rights of parties) In the course of the investigation, the staff of the executive branch have the right to make presentations and pleas. Administrative law enforcement errones may be brought to justice by the responsible person for administrative disposition or administrative treatment. Article 25 The admissibility of the complaint shall take a decision within the statutory period. The execution of administrative disposition or administrative processing is not discontinued during the complaint. The admissibility of the complaint examines whether the administrative disposition or administrative treatment is wrong and that the former authorities should rectify it in a timely manner. Article 26 The investigation of cases of misresponsibilities in administrative law enforcement, the treatment of persons with respect to the relevant administrative law enforcement or the interest of administrative law enforcement officials, may affect fair treatment, should be avoided. Article 27 The period of administrative disposition was warning, six months; twelve months; eighteen months; eighteen months; eighty-eight months; degradation, dismissal and 24 months. Administrative law enforcement errones are subject to administrative disposition other than dismissal and are retroactive during administrative disposal and no disciplinary action has been taken, and the administrative disposition decision organs have been removed and informed themselves in writing. Annex VI Article 28 (Central accountability) There is a need for criminal accountability for the responsible administrative law enforcement and the transfer of justice by law. There is a need for accountability for administrative law enforcement officers to be held accountable for the party's disciplinary responsibility and to be transferred to the disciplinary sector by law. Article 29 The administration of justice was held accountable for the statutory authorization of the city, the administrative commissioning organization and other staff with social management and public service functions, taking into account the implementation of the scheme. Article 33 (As of implementation) This approach was implemented effective 1 March 2007. |
