| Administrative supervision has deficiencies such as lack of supervision independence,narrow scope of supervision,and failure to form anti-corruption synergy.In order to solve these problems and improve the level and ability of the country to control corruption,the state has promoted the reform of the supervision system to make the comprehensive rule of law enter a new journey.In 2018,the national,provincial,municipal,and county supervision committees were established,the supervision organization structure and supervision system were further improved,and the rule of law thinking and supervision methods were gradually standardized.The county-level supervisory committee,as the specialized agency responsible for county-level supervisory functions,directly faces the towns,streets and villages.It is on the front line of receiving letters and interviews and solving the demands of the masses.It is an important part of fulfilling grassroots supervision and supervision and realizing the high-quality development of supervision.However,the reform is not accomplished overnight.From the perspective of the county-level supervisory committee’s performance dilemma,it is necessary to analyze the current supervisory system reform that needs to be optimized and perfected.This paper adopts a combination of literature research,questionnaire survey,and individual interviews,using the theory of rule of law,power checks and balances,and supervision theory to analyze and study the organizational structure,operating mechanism,reform effectiveness,and performance of the supervision function of the Q County Supervisory Committee.,To explore the predicament of the county-level supervisory committee in the performance of its functions,and then analyze the reasons for the dilemma of the county-level supervisory committee’s performance,and on this basis,put forward some countermeasures to solve the predicament of the performance.This paper found that the county-level supervisory committee has relatively weak investigative power in the performance of its duties,insufficient supervision at the same level,insufficient conditions for county-level risk prevention and control,insufficient use of investigation measures,and case assistance that cannot meet actual needs,etc.Many dilemmas.Through questionnaire analysis and in-depth interviews,the paper summarized the reasons for the dilemma: First,in terms of cadre team building,the number of supervisors is insufficient,the rotation of cadres is not enough,and the relative lack of high-precision talents;the second is the system and mechanism.The supervision system is not perfect,the co-investigation mechanism is not yet complete,and the jurisdiction system needs to be innovated;third,in terms of technical resources,the information platform needs to be optimized,and it is difficult to obtain external data resources.In this regard,this article proposes the following countermeasures: First,improve and perfect the laws and regulations,promote the reform of the supervision and review system,establish a coordination mechanism,and build an integrated supervision network.Second,strengthen the construction of the cadre team,pay attention to the training of high-tech talents,and formulate targeted training plans.Third,take the initiative to connect criminal trial standards,establish a reporting platform processing center,and focus on the construction and application of county-level supervisory information platforms.Fourth,weave a dense supervision network,establish a county-level mutual inspection mechanism,strictly supervise and restrict the “top leaders”,extend the grassroots supervision tentacles,and continuously improve the county and village three-level supervision system.Fifth,innovate the work model,give full play to the coordination and restriction of internal departments,and encourage the expansion of social supervision channels,so that the advantages of the special inspector system can be further utilized to ensure better development of supervision work. |
PDF Full Text Request