Handan Launches Interim Measures of Clean Governance Risk Appraisal and Prevention

Recently, CPC Handan Committee and Handan City Government of Hubei Province have released Interim Measures of Clean Governance Risk Appraisal and Prevention, which mainly centers on preventing possible clean governance risks before powers implementation and conduct appraisal warning on major decision items, important powerful departments and key posts. A prevention mechanism should be established so that mistakes can be avoided beforehand. The Interim Measures contains eight chapter and 19 items. The content can be divided into four parts.

First is the clean governance risk appraisal on major decisions. The Interim Measures regulates that major decisions concerning politics, economy, society, culture, ecological construction and direct interest of the masses should all be put under clean governance risk appraisal. The content of appraisal includes whether the major decisions to be made conflict with anti-corruption systems and whether they comply with related procedures; whether they could exert negative impact on clean governance of Party members and cadres and the seriousness of this impact; whether they harms the public interest; whether they might increase the possibility of corruption and unhealthy tendencies; whether there are effective prevention measures.

Second is the department and post clean governance risk appraisal, which can be divided into three categories of department clean governance risk, mid-level branch clean governance risk and post clean governance risk. Each category can be divided into three rankings according to seriousness. The Interim Measures has put forward concrete standards to divide clean governance risks of different departments and posts.

The risk ranking of departments and posts will mainly be decided by the procedures of self-evaluation, discussion of the public and organized inspection. Risky points will be found on the base of these procedures so as to enact targeted warning and prevention measures. Risk appraisal adheres to the principle of those who undertake a task will also be in charge of appraisal and take responsibility for the result.

The appraisal procedures include deciding people to be appraised, drafting appraisal plans, comprehensively conducting investigations and research, organizing expert argumentation and writing appraisal reports.

Third is the supervision and management of clean administration risk of departments. Eight institutions have been enacted, including clean administration risk self-inspection and report, regular inspection and analysis, preliminary review of reports through letters and reports on departments of highest risk ranking, democratic appraisal, audit institution and positions rotating institution, joint hearing of administrative license and keeping minutes for mid-level department meetings.

Different supervision and management measures have been put forward for departments and positions in different risk rankings. For example, discipline inspection and supervision organs will conduct risk warning and prevention inspections and democratic appraisal on departments of highest risk ranking every half-year and an economic responsibility audit every year.

As for reports through letters and reports on cadres and staff members of departments of highest risk ranking should all go through the preliminary reviews of the discipline inspection and supervision organs.

Fourth is supervision inspection and responsibility ascertaining. The Interim Measures decides to ascertain the responsibilities of department heads and related staff members for their failure to conduct clean administration risk appraisal and implement the risk management system if it caused serious results.

Decision-reviewing departments should take the major responsibility for their failure to conduct major decision clean administration risk appraisal according to requirements or suggest making decisions that cause major mistakes after the appraisal. Departments making major decisions should take direct responsibility for major mistakes caused by their failure to adopt suggestions of postponing decision-making or no decision-making after the appraisal.

According to the seriousness of the results, responsibility takers can be given penalty of organizational punishment, discipline punishment and transferred to judicial organs to ascertain their criminal responsibility.

(Source: CPC Hebei Provincial Commission for Discipline Inspection)