Qujing explores the mode of trial of cases, promotes standardization, corrects deviations, and makes up for shortcomings

The case trial room of the Discipline Inspection Commission of Huize County, Qujing City, Yunnan Province, recently gave feedback to the Discipline Work Committee of Zhongping Street in the county: "Disciplinary responsibility is disciplinary responsibility, legal responsibility is legal responsibility, and criminal punishment cannot be used instead of disciplinary punishment." Please conduct a supplementary investigation of the case to fully determine the erroneous facts of the person under review. ”

This is a microcosm of Qujing City's exploration of the case trial mode of "township case co-trial, centralized triage, and quality evaluation" and forging the "iron case project".

The co-trial of township cases is mainly the case trial department of the county-level Discipline Inspection Commission Supervision Commission conducting "secondary assistance in the trial" of complex and difficult cases handled by the township (street) discipline (work) committee, and the co-trial opinions are promptly fed back after discussion by the standing committee of the county-level discipline inspection commission. According to the person in charge of the case trial room of the Qujing Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection, the township case co-trial can solve the "flaws" caused by the weak case-handling strength and insufficient case-handling experience at the grass-roots level, and ensure that the case characterization is accurate and the measurement and discipline are appropriate.

The quality of a case is the life of a case. On the basis of township case co-trial, the Discipline Inspection Commission of Qujing City discipline inspection commission has simultaneously promoted the centralized trial of difficult cases and the evaluation of case quality, relying on the city and county level case trial cadres to establish a "centralized pool of trial talents", regularly conducting centralized trials of key cases in the city, using cases as a substitute for training, and using trial to promote learning, not only to ensure the quality of case trial, but also to enhance the ability and level of case trial cadres to use rule of law thinking and rule of law methods to punish corruption, and to promote the legalization and standardization of examination and investigation work.

In the course of the centralized triage, the discipline inspection and supervision organs of Qujing City also adopted such forms as consulting with the judicial organs to intervene and organizing elite forces to set up a triage team to conduct a centralized review of some cases of violations of discipline and law with complicated characterization and relatively difficult to measure discipline.

The discipline inspection and supervision organs at all levels in the city regard quality appraisal as an important starting point, do a solid job in examining and investigating the "second half of the article", carry out double evaluation of cases submitted for approval at the city and county levels, and conduct comprehensive assessments of the discipline inspection and supervision committees of the county (city, district) discipline inspection commissions and the discipline inspection and supervision work committees of the municipal organs directly under the municipal government, so as to promote the standardized and orderly trial of cases.

Since the reform of the supervision system, Qujing City has explored and practiced the case trial model of "township case co-trial, centralized triage, and quality assessment" to promote standardization, correct deviations, and make up for shortcomings, effectively improve the discipline and law literacy and performance ability of case-handling personnel, promote the institutionalization and standardization of case trials in the city, strictly "export customs" the quality of cases, and improve the quality of cases as a whole. By the end of last year, the city's discipline inspection and supervision organs at all levels had tried a total of 5,130 cases and 5,729 people, given party disciplinary sanctions to 4,688 people, and 1,127 government sanctions, of which 313 cases and 355 people were transferred to the procuratorial organs for examination and prosecution according to law.