Article 1 provides for the establishment of this provision in the light of the provisions of the relevant laws, regulations and regulations, in order to promote the administration of the executive branch by regulating the Government's major administrative decision-making practices and by improving the quality and efficiency of decision-making.

Article 2

Article 3. Major administrative decision-making should uphold the principles of science, democracy and legitimacy and follow the decision-making mechanisms that combine public participation, expert opinions, risk assessment, legitimacy review and collective discussions.

Article IV. The Executive Office of the Government (rooms) in the city, the district and district) is responsible for the organization, coordination and guidance of major administrative decisions.

The Government's rule of law sector is responsible for the review of the legitimacy of major administrative decisions and the preparation of major administrative decisions.

The Administrative Inspectorate is responsible for administrative supervision of the work related to the functioning of the Government and the design and implementation of the decision-making process at the lower level.

Risk assessment management is responsible for the preparation of the social stabilization risk assessment report.

Article 5. Major administrative decision-making is administered on the ground. The municipal and district governments are responsible for the decision-making and management of major administrative decision-making matters within the Territory.

Implementation of the major administrative decision-making system is included in the scope of the municipal government's administrative examination in the provinces (markets, districts) and municipalities.

Chapter II Scope of decision-making

The major administrative decisions referred to in this article refer to decisions taken by the Government in accordance with its statutory mandate on the full range of economic and social development in the region of the relationship, with a wide range of social implications and in close cooperation with citizens, legal persons and other organizations.

Article 7. Major administrative decisions include the following:

(i) Develop major policy measures for economic and social development;

(ii) Develop and revise the overall planning of economic, social, cultural development and public services;

(iii) The use of significant financial resources to arrange major government investment projects to dispose of major State assets;

(iv) Development of natural resources that have a significant impact on national economic and social development;

(v) Construction projects or investment projects that may have a significant impact on the ecological environment, urban area functions;

(vi) Develop major policy measures for urban construction, environmental protection, land management, labour employment, social security, cultural health, science and technology education, housing security, transport management, food drug security;

(vii) Major measures for institutional reform;

(viii) There may be a risk of social stability in relation to large-scale evictions, increased burdens of agricultural farmers, and changes in large-scale national enterprises;

(ix) Other major administrative matters that require Government decisions.

The following matters shall not be considered as administrative policymaking matters:

(i) Market competition mechanisms can be effectively regulated;

(ii) Citizens, legal persons or other organizations can decide autonomously;

(iii) Industry organizations or intermediaries are able to manage themselves independently;

(iv) grass-roots organizations can be managed autonomously.

The following matters of article 9 do not apply to this provision:

(i) The development of government regulations and the preparation of draft local legislation;

(ii) Personnel departure;

(iii) Development of internal government management measures;

(iv) Emergency response to emergencies;

(v) Other matters provided for in the decision-making process are already provided in laws, regulations and regulations.

Article 10 provides a directory for major administrative decisions of the Government. The Executive Office of the Government (rooms) or the organs entrusted by it shall make a directory of major administrative decision-making matters for each of the first quarters with the development reform, inspection, finance, rule of law, risk assessment management, and shall be published upon approval by the municipality. Contents include project names, sub-offices and completion time. It should be published in a timely manner.

Incorporating major administrative decision-making matters in the catalogue management, the UNOPS should be strictly implemented in accordance with this provision.

Chapter III Decision-making process

Article 11. Major administrative decision-making by the people of the city, the district and the district shall be subject to the following procedures:

(i) The establishment of the sub-office;

(ii) Research;

(iii) Draft decision-making;

(iv) Organizing risk assessment, expert perceptions;

(v) Publication of the solicitation of views or organization of hearings;

(vi) Review of the legitimacy of the draft decision-making;

(vii) To draw collective discussion on decisions.

The following persons or institutions may make significant administrative decision-making recommendations to the municipal government:

(i) Mayor, Deputy Mayor, Secretary-General, Under-Secretary-General;

(ii) People's Government in the district (markets, areas);

(iii) Municipal government departments, agencies, provincial offices;

(iv) Other State bodies, democratic parties or groups of people, business units, grass-roots organizations, industry organizations, intermediary agencies, academic groups, etc.;

(v) Agent representative and a member of the political union;

(vi) Other citizens.

Significant administrative decision-making recommendations should be presented for reasons and basis for decision-making recommendations, issues to be addressed, and related materials such as a solution.

Article 13

(i) Significant administrative decision-making matters raised by the Mayor directly into the decision-making process.

(ii) Major administrative decision-making recommendations made by the Deputy Mayor, which may be determined by the Mayor.

(iii) The Secretary-General, the Under-Secretary-General's proposals for major administrative decision-making, which may be determined by the mayor of the report after the approval of the Deputy Mayor.

(iv) The Government of the People's Government, the Municipal Government, the dispatch agency, the provincial department's presence unit, the main administrative decision-making recommendation, which is determined by the Mayor after the approval of the Deputy Mayor.

(v) Significant administrative decision-making recommendations from other units, representatives of the human person, members of the political union or other citizens, which are made by the Executive Office of the Municipal Government with the relevant departments for the first instance, with the approval of the Deputy Mayor, the mayors' report.

People's governments, municipalities, government departments, dispatch agencies are able to decide on their mandates or to take decisions more effectively.

Major administrative decision-making recommendations of the People's Government (markets, zones) are dealt with, taking into account article 1, paragraph 1.

Article 14 identifies major administrative decision-making matters and decision-making matters determined by the superior, municipal or its Standing Committee, in accordance with the previous article, the municipal authorities should designate offices and include decision-making matters in major administrative decision-making matters.

Article 15 may organize, on its own initiative, a draft major administrative decision-making, or to entrust the relevant expert or professional research institutions with drafting. The draft decision-making should contain elements such as decision-making goals, work mandates, methods of measures, time steps, decision-making delivery and cooperation sectors, funding budgets, post-decision-making evaluation plans, and should be accompanied by a drafting note.

Draft decision-making should be drafted on the basis of law and policy and on research studies to fully capture and analyse relevant aspects of decision-making matters.

Major administrative decision-making on the need for multi-programme comparative studies should be developed with more than two options for decision-making that could be chosen, with pro-active advice and justification.

Article 16 should establish a programme of work for social stabilization risk assessment and conduct a social stabilization risk assessment of the draft decision-making. The assessment includes matters such as public safety, labour employment, social security, environmental protection, transport management, legal disputes, the identification of risk levels, the formation of risk assessment reports and the provision of preventive, mitigation or mitigation measures. The UNOPS may organize self-organizational assessments or entrust the assessment of third parties, such as specialized agencies.

Risk levels are high, and the sub-offices should make recommendations to the municipalities in a timely manner to discuss decisions or not to discuss decisions.

In the risk hierarchy, the subsidiaries should make detailed responses to advance cases, propose preventive, mitigation or adaptation measures, and the municipality decides to continue the implementation of the decision-making process.

Article 17 provides for more professional decision-making matters, and the sub-office shall organize expert arguments for the selection of more than three authoritative, representative experts or specialized research institutions in the relevant areas by means of public invitations or randomly drawn.

After the expert or a professional research institution's argument, written statements of signatures or chapters shall be made. Significant administrative decision-making matters relating to civil life or major social impacts should be invited to participate in the identification and assessment of views and assessments by representatives of the public.

Article 18 Governments of municipalities, districts (markets, zones) should establish a pool of decision-making experts composed of academics from different areas and regions. Governments of districts (markets, zones) may also choose experts directly from the municipal government decision-making expert pool.

Experts and representatives participating in the argument were entitled to access the relevant information, attend relevant meetings, participate in relevant research activities and conduct independent arguments and be responsible for the submissions. The offices should ensure that experts and representatives conduct independent arguments.

In addition to the significant administrative decision-making matters that should be confidential by law, the UNOPS shall seek the views of the relevant functional and lower-level government on the draft decision-making.

In the absence of other departments or lower-level government advice, the sub-offices should be consulted with the author's units; the consultations are still unable to reach agreement and the sub-offices should make a specific note.

Article 20 should be amended by the Office of the High Contracting Parties to form a decision-making request based on the risk assessment report, expert opinions and other sectoral and sub-ministerial comments.

Article 21, with the consent of the current Government, may openly consult with the society on the draft decision-making.

In addition to seeking social public advice in accordance with the preceding paragraph, the Agency may also seek social public advice through hearings, colloquiums, questionnaires or other means.

The second article of the decision-making request is open to the society, which should be made available through public media such as the press, the Internet or radio television, and the public consultation time shall not be less than 20 days, and the laws, regulations, regulations and regulations provide otherwise.

The public may make observations and recommendations on the draft decision-making, or other decision-making programmes.

The following major administrative decisions should be heard:

(i) There is a wide range of social attention in relation to major public interests;

(ii) The high level of public attention in relation to the people's public interest;

(iii) Significant differences in decision-making programmes involving the interests of different groups;

(iv) It may have a greater impact on social stability;

(v) In the opinion of the decision-making organs, the evidence should be heard;

(vi) Legal, regulatory and regulatory provisions should be held.

Article 24 sought public advice in the form of hearings, and the sub-office should be organized in accordance with the following provisions:

(i) The publication of hearings at least 7 days of advance, the time, place, content and the names of the hearing representatives and the admission of public names.

(ii) The selection of hearing participants, including through voluntary newspapers, targeted selection options, to ensure the broad representation of the witness participants and to make the list of participants in the hearings in advance; and that the current civil service shall not be elected as a witness representative.

(iii) The moderator shall be appointed by the organs of the rule of law of the decision-making body or by the inspector; the hearing will be held by the drafting officer to make a statement on decision-making matters at the hearings and to receive a hearing to the hostage.

(iv) A request for views, a drafting note for decision-making and other relevant materials should be sent to the hearing representative at least 5 days before the hearings.

(v) The hearings should produce hearings and hearings reports that should serve as an important basis for major administrative decisions.

(vi) The hearings should be held to allow mass hearings and media interviews.

Article 25 sought public opinion in the form of a colloquium, which should invite representatives of citizens, legal persons or other social organizations that benefit from the relationship. The draft decision-making request and its drafting note should be sent to the participants at least 5 days in advance.

The public opinion should be sought in a public opinion by means of public opinion, and independent research institutions should be commissioned and written investigation reports.

Following the completion of public participation, the solicitation for decision-making should be subject to the approval of the rule of law institutions of the host office. The institution of the rule of law of the Agency should conduct a review of legality in terms of the competence, procedures, content and content of the decision-making body and form a review report. After the adoption of a collective discussion by the UNOPS, the draft decision-making and its drafting notes were developed.

A drafting note on the draft decision-making should clarify the adoption of public views.

Article 27 shall bring the draft decision to the attention of the current Government and send the following materials to the Executive Office of the Government (rooms):

(i) Request for consideration by the Government;

(ii) Draft decision-making and drafting notes;

(iii) Legal basis and policy basis of the draft;

(iv) To seek summary material, risk assessment reports, expert advice, hearing reports and other relevant materials.

The Executive Office of the Twenty-eighth Government (room) should be processed within five working days of the receipt of the material submitted by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights for consideration, considering that the draft decision-making should be sent to the Government's rule of law sector for a review of legality, and that the material was not sufficient and should be returned to the additional material from the Office.

The draft decision-making, which has not been reviewed by the Government's rule of law, shall not be submitted to the Government for its consideration.

Article 29 of the Government's rule of law sector should provide a review of legality within 15 working days of the date of receipt of the material submitted for consideration.

Article 33 The rule of law of the Government shall be subject to a review of legality:

(i) Does decision-making matters fall within the statutory competence of the Government;

(ii) The legality of the content of the draft;

(iii) The draft drafting process is in compliance with the procedure established.

In the course of the review of legality, the Government's rule of law sector may require that the UNOPS supplement the relevant material and that the time period for the review of legality is not taken into account during the supplementary material.

In carrying out the review of legality, article 31 of the Government's rule of law considers it necessary to invite the experts concerned to give legitimacy. The argument of legality should serve as one of the basis for the review of the Government's rule of law.

Article 32 of the Government's rule of law sector should provide the following review of the draft decision based on different circumstances:

(i) Recommendations to be submitted to the Government for its consideration;

(ii) Recommendations to be submitted to the Government for its consideration, subject to changes in part of the draft;

(iii) The draft decision-making goes beyond the statutory competence of the Government, the content of the draft or the existence of a drafting process, and recommends that the Government should not be submitted for consideration.

Draft decision-making shall be considered by the plenary of the Government or by the ordinary session.

The Government's Executive Office (rooms) should be processed within 10 working days after the receipt of the Government's Legality Review, which may be submitted for consideration by the Government, after the approval of the Government's leadership, drawing the Government's main leadership in organizing the plenary or the deliberations of the Standing Committee, which considered that it was not possible to be submitted for consideration by the Government, and that it should be backed to the office to request improvements.

Article 34 of the Government's plenary meetings or meetings should take decisions on the adoption, adoption, modification, reconsideration or suspension of the draft decision.

During the time of the draft decision-making, the sub-office may, with the consent of the Government's head, remind the Government of its reconsideration of whether the Government's main leadership decisions are considered again.

Draft decision-making that has been held for more than one year will no longer be considered.

Article XV should open decision-making matters, on the basis of decision-making and decision-making results through public media such as government websites, newspapers and newspapers, with the exception of the lawfulness of the law.

Article 36 should be made available in a timely manner in the decision-making process, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the People's Republic of China Archives Act.

Chapter IV Policy management

Article 37 implements the post-decision-making assessment system. The decision-making executive branch organizes post-decision-making assessments in accordance with the following provisions:

(i) Periodic assessments, depending on the time frame for implementation established by decision-making or the period of effectiveness;

(ii) To entrust professional research institutions with an assessment, which should be an institution that does not participate in the drafting stages of decision-making;

(iii) The assessment should seek public advice and the public could provide an assessment of the implementation of decision-making;

(iv) The assessment of organizational units should produce post-decision-making assessment reports, assess the content of decision-making, the implementation of decision-making and make recommendations for the continuation, cessation of implementation, suspension or revision of decision-making elements.

As a result of a significant change in force or objective circumstances, the decision-making hosting sector should organize, in a timely manner, temporary remedies and, in accordance with paragraph (ii), (iii), (iv) of this article, post-decision-making assessments.

Article 338 Post-decision-making assessment reports suggest that decisions should be discontinued or suspended, with the consent of the Government's plenary or the Standing Conference.

The post-decision-making assessment report recommends significant changes in the content of decision-making, in accordance with the procedure set out in chapter III of this provision.

The decision of the Government to put an end to implementation, suspension or revision of decision-making should take effective measures to minimize or reduce economic losses and adverse social impacts.

Article 39 of the Government's supervisory body, the administrative inspectorate and the Government's rule of law sector should organize work on the drafting, implementation and evaluation of decision-making, inspection, etc., as well as supervision, in accordance with the content of decision-making and the Government's deployment, and take steps to follow up on the inspection, promotion and follow-up and implementation of decision-making procedures and report on monitoring to the Government in a timely manner.

Article 40 citizens, legal persons or other social organizations have the right to oversee decision-making and implementation, and may make observations or recommendations to Governments, sub-offices, decision-making enforcement departments and the executive branch.

The law is governed by the law by the law by representatives of the United Nations, the members of the PDR.

Chapter V Legal responsibility

Article 40 establishes a system of accountability for lifetime and accountability for major administrative decisions. Specific approaches are developed by the municipal inspection services.

Article 42, in decision-making processes such as public participation, expert opinions, hearings, statements made by experts and representatives are not legally prosecuted.

In the course of the expert opinion, the written opinion of the expert was common and wrong and the signature expert should assume the liability for the associated contract.

In the course of risk assessment, the unit responsible for risk assessment should anticipate and not anticipate social stability risks, result in group sexual events and hold legal responsibility for risk assessment units.

Article 42 staff members of the sub-offices have one of the following acts, which are governed by the law by their units or by superior authorities, causing serious consequences and hold criminal responsibility in accordance with the law.

(i) No decision-making process, as prescribed;

(ii) Provision of false material or concealment of significant information;

(iii) Other circumstances leading to errors in decision-making and serious consequences.

Annex VI

Article 46 Governments (markets, zones) and their related functional sectors should develop sound decision-making processes in the light of the actual situation in the region and in the light of this provision.

Article 47 Governments (communes, districts) all sectors of the municipality wishing to develop a directory of major administrative decision-making matters in the region, in the current sector, to be submitted to the municipal authorities' rule of law sector, and to reproduce municipal risk assessment management and administrative inspection agencies. It should be restructured and sent within 10 days of the date of the adjustment and be sent to the relevant sectors of the city.

Article 48 Eighteen municipalities, district-level finances should be guaranteed by the Government's purchase of services or other means for the misworking and evidentiary costs of experts and representatives participating in the argument, and to guarantee the transportation costs and the cost of work of the participants.

Article 49