Author: yelihua source: seeking truth (id:gh_a2f5eb6a8f0c)
Recently, I talked a lot with readers about the Henan Red code incident, but I didn’t talk about handling and accountability.
I have a few small questions to ask. I don’t mean to handle it inappropriately or lightly. I absolutely don’t mean anything. I just have questions about some wording.
In the circular on the investigation and accountability of depositors of some rural banks who have been assigned red codes (hereinafter referred to as the circular), these two paragraphs were made.
Fengxianbin, zhanglinlin, Chenchong, yangyaohuan, Zhao Yong and other comrades have weak awareness of the rule of law and rules. They violate the administrative measures for the prevention and control of COVID-19 in Henan Province and the rules for assigning and transcoding health codes, and assign red codes to those who do not meet the conditions for assigning codes without authorization, which seriously undermines the seriousness of the regulations on the management and use of health codes and causes serious adverse social impact. This is a typical disorderly act. Fengxianbin Comrade zhanglinlin bears the main leadership responsibility and important leadership responsibility respectively, while comrades Chenchong, yangyaohuan and Zhaoyong bear the direct responsibility for this, and should be strictly and seriously held accountable.
In accordance with the regulations of the Communist Party of China on disciplinary measures and the law of the people’s Republic of China on administrative sanctions against public officials, comrade fengxianbin was given the punishment of removing his post within the party and removing him from office by administrative affairs; Comrade zhanglinlin was given a serious warning within the party and demoted in government affairs; Chen Chong shall be given the punishment of recording a major demerit in government affairs; Comrades yangyaohuan and Zhaoyong were given administrative demerits.
Their behavior is characterized by weak awareness of the rule of law and the rules. The problem is that Feng Xianbin’s post is the standing deputy of the political and Legal Affairs Commission. As a standing deputy of the political and Legal Affairs Commission, he has a weak awareness of the rule of law.
One of the duties of the political and Legal Affairs Commission is to support and supervise political and legal units in exercising their functions and powers according to law, inspect the implementation of the party’s line, principles and policies, major decisions and arrangements of the Party Central Committee, and national laws and regulations by political and legal units, guide and coordinate the close cooperation between political and legal units, improve the work connection and cooperation mechanism with discipline inspection and supervision organs, and promote strict law enforcement and fair justice.
A cadre with a weak awareness of the rule of law, you asked him to promote strict law enforcement and fair justice. Did he do it?
My first question is that when an accident happened, he had a weak awareness of the rule of law. Why didn’t he find that he had a weak awareness of the rule of law when investigating the appointment of this cadre?
I don’t mean to handle it inappropriately or lightly. I absolutely don’t mean anything. I just have questions about some wording. We should understand the dissatisfaction of the masses, because the masses must have doubts after reading the circular.
These cadres, in violation of the measures for the administration of health codes for the prevention and control of COVID-19 in Henan Province and the rules for the transfer of health codes, assigned codes to others without authorization, and also gave them red.
It doesn’t matter if we violate the measures of Henan Province for the management of health codes for the prevention and control of COVID-19, because we also have a law of the people’s Republic of China on the prevention and control of infectious diseases, which contains 66 articles:
If the administrative department of public health of the people’s government at or above the county level, in violation of the provisions of this law, commits any of the following acts, the people’s government at the corresponding level or the administrative department of public health of the people’s government at a higher level shall order it to make corrections and circulate a notice of criticism; Where the spread or prevalence of infectious diseases or other serious consequences are caused, the persons who are in charge and other persons who are directly responsible shall be given administrative sanctions according to law; If a crime is constituted, criminal responsibility shall be investigated according to law:
?1? Failing to perform the duty of informing, reporting or publicizing the epidemic situation of infectious diseases according to law, or concealing, falsely reporting or delaying the reporting of the epidemic situation of infectious diseases;
My second question is, is the epidemic prevention and control headquarters a health administrative department? In a literal sense, it counts. So, in this incident, these people gave people red codes without authorization. Did they involve illegal and false reporting of the epidemic situation?
I don’t mean to handle it inappropriately or lightly. I absolutely don’t mean anything. I just have questions about some wording.
The circular also stated that accountability should be strictly enforced.
Let me take a closer look at the removal of party posts, the removal of government officials from office, the serious warning within the party, the demotion of government officials, the recording of major demerits in government affairs and the recording of demerits in government affairs.
We have a mature system for punishing party members and cadres, and we have four solutions to the mistakes made by comrades, with the severity increasing.
1? Inner party relations should be normalized, criticism and self-criticism should be carried out regularly, so that biting the ear, pulling the sleeve and sweating with a red face become the norm;
2? Party discipline and organizational punishment should be the majority;
3? Serious disciplinary actions and major job adjustments should be a minority;
4? Only a very small number of serious violations of discipline and suspected violations of laws can be filed for review.
The notice stated that it seriously damaged the seriousness of the regulations on the management and use of health codes and caused serious adverse social impact. It is a typical disorderly act, two serious and one typical.
Why are two serious and one typical cases followed by light punishment and organizational treatment?
Be strict and severe. Why didn’t they be punished for serious violations of discipline? Not to mention that this has violated the law on the prevention and control of infectious diseases and may involve false reporting of the epidemic situation.
My third question is, how should fengxianbin deal with people forging health codes? Now that he has forged his own health code, he will be dismissed? What kind of strict punishment is this?