Key Benefits:
(Summit No. 75 of 24 July 2006 of the Government of the People of the city of Zenzi, considered the adoption of the Ordinance No. 105 of 5 August 2006 of the Order No. 105 of the People's Government of the city of Zenin, which came into force on 1 September 2006) Article 1 regulates and oversees the performance of administrative law enforcement duties by executive law enforcement agencies and their law enforcement personnel, protects the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, legal persons or other organizations, and develops this approach in the light of the relevant laws, regulations. Article 2 The law, regulations, regulations and regulations hold additional provisions for the accountability of administrative law enforcement. Article 3. Administrative law enforcement is responsible for upholding the principle of legality, education and corrections, punishment and accountability. Article IV. Administrative law enforcement agencies and their law enforcement officials have one of the following acts and should be held accountable for the violation of the law: (i) The main fact that there is insufficient evidence; (ii) The application of laws, regulations, regulations and regulations is manifestly wrong; (iii) Violations of statutory procedures; (iv) go beyond or abuse of the statutory authority; (v) Failure to perform statutory duties; (vi) Other offences. Article 5 recognizes that administrative law enforcement agencies and their law enforcement officials have committed violations of administrative law enforcement and should be held accountable for the enforcement of the law: (i) The General Assembly and its Standing Committees have found and confirmed administrative law enforcement violations in their oversight; (ii) The final judgement of the People's Court, the decision to remove, modify, confirm administrative law enforcement, or the administrative law enforcement of the obligation; (iii) The decision of the executive review body to remove, modify, confirm administrative law enforcement offences, or administrative law enforcement violations committed by an order of responsibility; (iv) Government and administrative law enforcement authorities at all levels have found and confirmed administrative law enforcement offences in the process of receiving administrative law complaints, reports of legal persons and other organizations. The executive organs that have confirmed that administrative law enforcement acts are in conflict with the law should submit judgements, judgements, decisions, copies of decisions, copies of the book to the Government of the People's Rule of Law and the law body at the highest level, within five working days from the date of receipt of judgements, rulings, decisions, decisions, decisions, etc.; and executive law enforcement agencies that are vertically led to the proceedings before their superior executive body. Article 6 is independent of the executive law enforcement authority for administrative law enforcement offences and assumes responsibility for administrative law enforcement. Two or more administrative law enforcement agencies jointly commit administrative law enforcement offences, with the primary responsibility of the host authorities and the corresponding responsibility of other organs. The executive law enforcement authorities are responsible for administrative law enforcement in order to implement decisions, reviews, instructions and instructions from the superior administrative authorities to commit administrative law violations. Article 7 is one of the following cases in which the custodian should assume responsibility for administrative law enforcement: (i) Execution of administrative law enforcement offences independently; (ii) The unauthorized application of administrative law enforcement offences, without legal review, approval; (iii) For reasons such as concealment of facts, concealment of evidence or the provision of non-removable circumstances, the reviewor, the author's decision of error; (iv) Removal, approval and enforcement of administrative law enforcement offences; (v) In the course of administrative law enforcement, serious consequences have been caused by significant negligence; (vi) There is no justification for the failure to perform the statutory duties. Article 8. The licensor shall assume responsibility for administrative law enforcement without the consent of the offender or without the approval of the author. Article 9 authorizes one of the following cases and should assume the responsibility for administrative law enforcement: (i) Approval of the change in the right opinion of the custodian, the reviewor; (ii) In the absence of the Procurator's proposal, the examination of the licensor, the direct decision has led to the occurrence of administrative law enforcement offences. Article 10. The custodian submits an error of opinion, the licensor, the rator, the rator, the ratifier, the rator, the rator, and the author, respectively, assumes the corresponding responsibility for administrative law enforcement. The reviewor does not adopt or change the right opinion of the custodian and, with the approval of the author, lead to the occurrence of administrative law enforcement offences, the licensor and the rator assume the corresponding administrative law enforcement responsibility. Article 11. More than two are jointly implementing administrative law enforcement offences, and the hostr assumes the primary responsibility for law enforcement, while others assume secondary responsibility for administrative law enforcement; they cannot distinguish between the primary and secondary responsibility and assume responsibility for administrative law enforcement. Article 12 has been determined by collective discussions to establish administrative law enforcement offences, with the primary responsibility for administrative law enforcement. Article 13, due to the non-performance of legal responsibilities, led to the occurrence of administrative law enforcement offences and, in accordance with their duties, to hold administrative law enforcement responsibilities for direct responsibilities, heads of management and principals. Article 14. The manner in which administrative law enforcement is held accountable: (i) A written inspection order; (ii) Removal of deadlines; (iii) Summaries; (iv) To inform criticism; (v) To suspend or revoke administrative law enforcement documents; (vi) induction training; (vii) Removal of the selection of advanced qualifications in the year; (viii) Removal of law enforcement positions; (ix) Removal of contracts; (x) Receive parts or all administrative compensation expenses under the law; (xi) Administrative disposal. The administrative law enforcement responsibility under the preceding paragraph may be applied either individually or jointly. Article 15. Administrative law enforcement responsibilities of administrative law enforcement organs, in accordance with the different circumstances in which they violate the statutory obligations, are held by the Government of the current people or by the inspectorate in accordance with the law; the enforcement of the responsibilities of the vertical management authority is held by law by the superior body or the inspectorate; and the enforcement of the responsibilities of the dual administration, in accordance with the relevant management responsibilities. The accountability of administrative law enforcement agencies should be based on the annual review of the executive. Article 16 In accordance with the relevant provisions of the National Compensation Act of the People's Republic of China, the executive law enforcement authorities should pay relief to law enforcement officials who have criminal responsibility. The accountability of administrative law enforcement officials should be prosecuted as the basis for the conduct of the administrative law enforcement officer's examination of the conduct of the award, punishment and dismissal, and the administrative disposition decision should be taken into its own archives. Article 17 provides guidance, coordination, supervision, supervision of the State's rule of law institutions responsible for the enforcement of the law throughout the city; the right to investigate cases of violations that have a significant social impact or the difficulty of doing so, or the designation of the relevant sectoral investigations to address the decisions of the Government. (b) Investigation of administrative law enforcement cases before the Government of the people at this level, the Government of the People's Republic of the Republic, the decision of this sector; With regard to the duty of an exemption authority, the inspectorate to hold accountability for administrative law enforcement, the immunity authority or the inspectorate, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the State and the city, is dealt with within the prescribed time frame, in accordance with the legislative authority and procedures. The relevant sectors, such as audit, finance, should support and cooperate with the accountability of administrative law enforcement. Article 18 The investigators may consult the relevant administrative law enforcement agencies and reprint the relevant file to enquire the persons concerned. The investigation organs and personnel should refrain from disrupting and impeding the investigation, if any. The investigators should produce a notice. The investigators have a direct stake in the cases investigated and should be avoided. Article 19, the People's Government of the District and the Ministry of the People's Government are disputed with respect to administrative law enforcement responsibility, and the Government of the city is invited to decide. There are more than two statutory grounds for the accountability of administrative law enforcement, which is chosen by the executive law enforcement responsible for violations. However, the same violation shall not duplicate accountability. Article 20, in which administrative law enforcement officials are not responsible for the alleged administrative law enforcement, may apply to the relevant authorities for re-exploitation and complaint. During the review, the enforcement of the former administrative law enforcement responsibility was not stopped. However, the review, the complaint body considers it necessary to suspend implementation. Article 21, Administrative law enforcement agencies and their law enforcement officials have one of the following cases, criticized them; serious circumstances and administrative disposition; constituted criminal liability by law: (i) Administrative law enforcement authorities should not be held accountable for the accountability of administrative law enforcement officials; (ii) The judgement, the judgement, the letter of decision, the non-statement of the decision or the late submission shall be reported to affect accountability for administrative law enforcement; (iii) Interference, obstruction or incompatibility with investigations into the responsibility of the breach; (iv) To combat and reprisal against administrative law enforcement complaints, reporting agents or investigators; (v) To refrain from redressing violations; (vi) To deny accountability for administrative law enforcement. Article 22, the Ombudsman, the rule of law body, in one of the following cases in which administrative law enforcement is held accountable, gives criticism; in serious circumstances, administrative disposition; and criminal responsibility under the law: (i) The intentional concealment of an offence or the discovery of an offence without prosecution; (ii) deliberately increase or mitigate the responsibility of persons responsible; (iii) The transfer of criminal responsibility by the judiciary in accordance with the law. Article 23 of this approach refers to a staff member who performs administrative law enforcement; the reviewer refers to the head of the institution within the executive law enforcement authority; and the author refers to the principal head of the executive law enforcement authority. In accordance with the internal division of labour or with the authorization of other staff, the exercise of the right to review, approval, and the specific exercise of the right to review and approval, is considered to be the reviewor, the author. Article 24 |
