Key Benefits:
(Summit No. 51 of 22 August 2005 of the Government of the Greateren Province considered the adoption of Decree No. 186 of 26 August 2005 of the Order of the People's Government of the Province of Nimin, which came into force on 1 October 2005) Article 1, in order to strengthen administrative law enforcement oversight, regulate administrative law enforcement, correct and investigate administrative misconduct, protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations and promote the development of this approach in line with the provisions of the relevant laws, regulations and regulations. Article II of this approach refers to the misperceptions of administrative law enforcement at all levels of the people's Government and its subordinate executive law enforcement authorities (with laws, regulations authorizing law enforcement or legally delegated law enforcement organizations, with the same) and specific staff in administrative enforcement activities such as administrative licences, administrative fees, administrative penalties, administrative enforcement, administrative enforcement, etc.) that do not carry out or do not properly perform the mandated duties. Article 3. This approach applies to the misresponsibility of the administration of justice at all levels of the people's administration in my province, as well as the administrative law enforcement and specific staff. Article IV is responsible for administrative law enforcement and should uphold the principles of integrity, integrity, error and accountability. Article 5 Governments and departments should ensure that administrative law enforcement errants are mainstreamed into administrative law enforcement accountability and evaluation of the nuclear system, as well as leadership performance appraisal, and serve as an important basis for the year-end government body's objective accountability. Article 6. The Government of the people at the district level is responsible for the accountability of the executive law enforcement branch and the lower-level Government. The executive branch of the Government of the above-ranking population is responsible for the accountability of the executive law enforcement agencies to which they belong. The executive law enforcement department, headed by the province, is responsible for the accountability of administrative law enforcement in the lower administration. The Government of the people of the vertically led administrative law enforcement sector can make recommendations for accountability to its superior authorities. The Government's rule of law, inspection, personnel sector performs the relevant responsibilities of administrative law enforcement in accordance with their respective legal responsibilities. Article 7 has one of the following cases: (i) go beyond or abuse of authority; (ii) Violations of statutory procedures; (iii) The error of the legal basis; (iv) Failure to perform or delay the fulfilment of the statutory duties; (v) The use of administrative law enforcement documents in law enforcement activities or in violation of administrative law enforcement documents; (vi) No statutory fees, fines, confiscation of property documents; (vii) The unauthorized use or disposal of seizures of property; (viii) Other unlawful administrative acts under the laws, regulations and regulations. Article 8 erroneous responsibility for administrative law enforcement is divided according to the following provisions: (i) Specific administrative actions taken directly by administrative law enforcement officials have resulted in a misperception of administrative law enforcement, with the full responsibility of the administrative law enforcement personnel; (ii) A specific administrative act, which is reviewed and approved by the executive law enforcement authorities, has resulted in a miscarriage of administrative law enforcement, with the primary responsibility of the head of the institution of the institution, the executive branch responsible for the secondary responsibility of the specific staff; the intentional concealment or misleading of the specific staff member, the supervision and approval of the head of the institution, the executive branch's head on the merits, resulting in excessive administrative law enforcement and the assumption of the primary responsibility of the specific staff, the heads of the institution, the executive branch; (iii) The head of the institution, the head of the executive branch shall refer to anonymous evidence, change of the facts of the case or the misappropriation of administrative law, with the primary responsibility of the head of the institution, the head of the executive branch, and the responsibility of specific staff; (iv) The collective discussion by the executive body of the specific administrative actions taken by the decision resulted in a misperception of administrative law, with the primary responsibility of the executive head and the secondary responsibility of other heads and specific staff; and the failure of those who were not accepted to be responsible for the right opinion. Article 9. Administrative law enforcement authorities have experienced misperceptions in administrative law, which are being restructured by the Government of the current people or by the superior authorities and the relevant responsibilities to hold accountable organs and to inform them of the dismissal of the higher qualifications; and those responsible for administrative law enforcement are treated in accordance with the following provisions: (i) In exceptional circumstances, criticizing the responsible person for education or giving warnings, depriving the responsible person's assessment of the qualifications of the responsibilities over the year, and allowing the suspension of the administrative law enforcement documents of the responsible person; (ii) In the event of a serious nature, giving the responsible person a custoded, rated, degraded or dismissed exercise, criticizing the responsible person, eliminating the administrative law qualifications of the responsible person and evaluating the advanced qualifications of the year, redeploying administrative law enforcement positions and collecting administrative law enforcement documents; (iii) The circumstances are particularly grave and constitute crimes and the transfer of the judiciary to justice. Article 10 is one of the following acts by a responsible administrative law enforcement officer and should be addressed again: (i) intentional or gross negligence; (ii) Causes administrative compensation; (iii) Obstacles, rejecting accountability for investigations; (iv) To combat, revenge and reprisal against complainants, prosecutors or investigators; (v) Over two years should be held accountable for administrative law error; (vi) Other cases under laws, regulations and regulations may be prosecuted. Article 11, in one of the following cases, can alleviate the responsibilities of the responsible person for administrative enforcement: (i) Administrative law enforcement has been a minor circumstance, with less consequences and impacts; (ii) Force majeure that administrative law enforcement has been exacerbated by the consequences; (iii) The wilful falsification or concealment of important evidence by the relative administrative administration, which has exacerbated the consequences of administrative law enforcement; (iv) The circumstances in which responsibility may be prosecuted or mitigated by an administrative body at the superior level. Article 12 (i) Execution of higher-level decisions or orders leading to miscarriage of administrative law enforcement; (ii) In minor circumstances, the administrative law enforcement erroneous responsibilities and their responsibilities have taken the initiative to detect errors in administrative law enforcement and to rectify them in a timely manner, without causing consequences; (iii) Laws, regulations and regulations based on administrative law enforcement are not clear or incompatible with the superior law, resulting in excessive administrative enforcement; (iv) The emergence of new evidence resulting in misperceptions in administrative law enforcement; (v) The error in the identification of findings by the statutory technical accreditation sector has led to a misperformance of administrative law enforcement; (vi) The force majeure caused administrative enforcement to take place. Article 13 Administrative law enforcement erroneously held that administrative law enforcement errors should be promptly reviewed and closed within 30 days of the date of the case and that administrative law enforcement should be held accountable. The situation is complex and, with the approval of the executive law enforcement errone, the executive head may extend the period of review as appropriate, but the extension period shall not exceed 20 days. Article 14. Administrative law enforcement should be erroneously determined by an administrative law enforcement erroneously responsible organ in accordance with the competence set forth in article 6 of this approach and the wrongdoing under Article 7. The judgement of the People's Court of Justice on administrative law enforcement, the review of the review body and the decision of the superior authority to withdraw or change the civil complaints, the reporting matter are also erroneous in the administration of justice. The accountability of administrative law enforcement is required for the administrative disposition of the responsible person, which is handled by the executive branch, the inspectorate, in accordance with the competent authority of the Ministry of Management; the removal of the administrative law qualifications of the responsible person, their suspension or the collection of administrative law enforcement documents is handled by the Government's rule of law. Article 15. Governments of all levels of people and executive law enforcement at all levels should be held in a timely manner in accordance with the provisions of this approach to accountability for administrative law errors and denial of accountability, and at the highest level the Government of the people has the authority to hold the relevant organs accountable or directly accountable. The responsible organ shall take a decision within 30 days and report back-to-level proceedings within 5 days of the date of the decision. Article 16 erroneous responsibilities by administrative law enforcement agencies may apply for review within 15 days from the date of receipt of the decision. The organs that receive the review shall take a review decision within 30 days and shall be sent to the body in question. The accountability officer is not responsible for administrative disposition and can appeal to the relevant sectors in accordance with the relevant provisions. During the review, the implementation of the original decision will not be discontinued. Article 17 is responsible for complaints by administrative law enforcement agencies against citizens, legal persons or other organizations, reported violations of the administration of justice, and should inform complaints, reporters of the results and, with a significant impact, should be made public. Article 18 organs responsible for administrative law enforcement and their staff should act in good faith and be strictly enforced. In cases of abuse of power, provocative fraud, malfeasing, administrative disposition by its units or superior authorities is lawful; in serious circumstances, constitute a crime and a transfer of criminal responsibility by the judiciary. Article 19, which was implemented effective 1 October 2005. |
