中國(guó)網(wǎng)站品牌欄目（頻道）
In an interview with China Daily published yesterday, a professor from the Party School of the Communist Party of China Central Committee said that government and Party officials found responsible for major accidents should never be promoted again "unless they make extraordinary contributions to society in their new positions."
The "expert on government regulations" made the remark while responding to the recent revelation of a series of cases in which disciplined and sacked officials were moved to different places to continue in their posts or even be promoted. Media reports about the cases have aroused public outcry.
The scholar's suggestion that the officials "should never be promoted again" sounds much too conclusive. One cannot rule out the possibility that the disgraced officials are of good nature, and that there was some element of fortuity in their role in the accidents.
Take for example Meng Xuenong, the former governor of Shanxi province that is recurrently stricken by coalmine accidents. He was appointed to the post in January 2008 only to be discharged in September the same year after the collapse of a coalmine that killed 270 people. Internet citizens called him "the most unlucky official". Earlier, in 2003, he had been sacked as the mayor of Beijing for the failure to deal adequately with SARS immediately after its outbreak in the city. This was just two months after he was promoted to the position.
I am not defending him against the decision of the central authorities to disqualify him. It is definitely a welcome practice to hold the highest official responsible for a major accident in his/her jurisdiction. At the same time, it should not be made absolute that an official would never be promoted once he made a mistake. It all depends on how much responsibility he/she actually had in the matter and if he/she is really bad or corrupt in a moral sense.
In fact, the public was infuriated over cases of disciplined officials continuing their career in a different place because of two reasons: First, many of the officials involved in the cases were corrupt; second, re-appointment of the officials was done by keeping all concerned in the dark.
Re-appointment by itself is not the problem. What deserves more attention is the process of these officials being moved and placed elsewhere. If the processes were open to public scrutiny, corrupt officials would never have the chance of being re-appointed; and, those sacked merely for dereliction of duty would be scrutinized by the public before being promoted. The point is that the authorities never publicize the process.
The promotion of an official with an undesirable record, however, should be conducted in a more transparent way, because these officials have lost public trust. There should be convincing evidence that they have made up for their mistakes and are qualified for the new jobs. In other words, there must be a mechanism to guarantee that the officials to be promoted are subjected to public scrutiny. This is exactly what China lacks in the management of officials.
"Administrative transparency," as has been advocated by the Chinese central government for many years, is a most effective way to curb officials' corruption. An opaque administration enables abuse of power to advance private interests. We should not rely on "education" alone for persuading officials to be honest and clean. There has to be a mechanism to compel them to act in the interests of the nation and the public.
Transparent administration is such a mechanism.
E-mail: liushinan@chinadaily.com.cn
About the author:
劉式南 高級(jí)編輯。1968年畢業(yè)于武漢華中師范學(xué)院（現(xiàn)華中師范大學(xué)）英文系。1982年畢業(yè)于北京體育學(xué)院（現(xiàn)北京體育大學(xué)）研究生院體育情報(bào)專業(yè)。1982年進(jìn)入中國(guó)日?qǐng)?bào)社，先后擔(dān)任體育記者、時(shí)政記者、國(guó)際新聞編輯、要聞版責(zé)任編輯、發(fā)稿部主任、《上海英文星報(bào)》總編輯、《中國(guó)商業(yè)周刊》總編輯等職?，F(xiàn)任《中國(guó)日?qǐng)?bào)》總編輯助理及專欄作家。1997年獲國(guó)務(wù)院“特殊貢獻(xiàn)專家政府津貼”。2000年被中華全國(guó)新聞工作者協(xié)會(huì)授予“全國(guó)百佳新聞工作者”稱號(hào)。2006年獲中國(guó)新聞獎(jiǎng)二等獎(jiǎng)（編輯）。
?相關(guān)閱讀：
Public mood is never to be ignored
Corruption as food for thought
Officials should channel spirit of Bethune
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
