China News Service, August 5th. According to the Supreme Law website, the Supreme People's Court issued the "Implementation Opinions on Deepening the Comprehensive Supporting Reforms of the Judicial Accountability System", which put forward the opinions and insisted on highlighting political standards in selecting and appointing people. Pay attention to grasp the specific performance at critical moments such as undertaking major cases, completing major tasks, participating in major struggles, and facing major challenges, and identify cadres through urgent, difficult and dangerous work such as epidemic prevention and control.
The opinion puts forward that, adhere to the political standard as the first standard, improve the identification and evaluation mechanism of the political quality of the court officers, refine the content of the inspection, optimize the path and methods, and improve the scientificity, accuracy and operability of the political quality inspection, and in the selection, appointment, promotion and promotion , Supervision and management, assessment and evaluation, training and training, commendation and rewards and other work strictly control politics. Explore the establishment of political quality files of cadres, and strengthen the normalized assessment and inspection of political loyalty, political determination, political responsibility, political ability, and political self-discipline. Pay attention to grasp the specific performance at critical moments such as undertaking major cases, completing major tasks, participating in major struggles, and facing major challenges, and identify cadres through urgent, difficult and dangerous work such as epidemic prevention and control.
The opinion puts forward that the responsibility for the trial of violations shall be strictly investigated. Improve the disciplinary procedures for judges, improve the procedural rules for investigation findings, submission for review, deliberation resolutions, and rights relief, adhere to the organic integration of serious accountability and legal protection, strictly distinguish the responsibility for quality defects in handling cases and the responsibility for illegal trials, and refine the judges and trial support personnel Standards for the division of responsibilities to improve the professionalism, transparency and credibility of judges’ punishment work. All higher people’s courts should actively promote the establishment of judge disciplinary committees at the provincial level, further standardize the establishment and composition of disciplinary committees, cooperate in formulating the charter and disciplinary work rules of judge disciplinary committees at the corresponding level, scientifically establish judge disciplinary work agencies, and formulate implementation rules .
Straighten out the relationship between the judge's disciplinary investigation and the disciplinary inspection and supervision investigation, the judge's disciplinary committee's review procedure and the disciplinary inspection and supervision review procedure, and ensure that the powers and responsibilities are clear and smooth. If the people’s courts at all levels find clues to the problems of judges or other court staff members suspected of violating discipline, illegal duties, or crimes on duty, they should be investigated and handled by the discipline inspection and supervision organs in accordance with relevant laws and regulations, and they shall be promptly transferred. Where the disciplinary inspection and supervision agency investigates suspected violations of discipline, duty violations, or duty crimes in accordance with the law, the Judge's Disciplinary Committee may provide review opinions from a professional perspective for the reference of the discipline inspection and supervision agencies.
Suggestions to improve the exit mechanism for judges. If a judge in a leading position fails to handle the case, fails to meet the requirements in handling the case, or handles the case under the name of a false name, and refuses to make corrections, he shall withdraw from the post. If the judge has withdrawn from the post and the court where he belongs has not initiated the withdrawal procedure, the people's court at a higher level shall promptly supervise and urge. If the judge disagrees with the decision concerning the withdrawal of the post, he may apply to the court where he holds a review within seven days after receiving the decision. If a judge needs to be removed from his legal post after resigning his post, he shall promptly apply for relevant removal procedures. After five years after the judge withdraws from the post due to the opinion of the Disciplinary Committee, or two years after withdrawing from the post due to voluntary application or failure to meet the performance appraisal of the case, the judge can reapply for the post.