Study On The Investigation Power Of Duty Crime For China’s Supervisory Committee

Since the reform of China’s supervision system,in order to achieve the goal of efficient and centralized anti-corruption,China has created an efficient and authoritative anti-corruption agency — the Supervisory Committee,which implements the system of the Commission for Discipline Inspection and the Supervisory Committee.The promulgation of the "Supervision Law" formally clarified that the Supervisory Committee has the power of supervision and investigation,which integrates the power of investigation of disciplinary commissions,administrative supervision organs,and procuratorates to investigate corruption cases.Therefore,the investigative power of the Supervisory Committee includes three powers: disciplinary violations,post violations,and duty crime investigation powers.The power of duty investigation is a vital component.Among them,investigative powers of the supervisory committee integrates the investigative power of the disciplinary inspection committee,the investigation of administrative organs,and the investigation and prosecution of procuratorates.Therefore,the investigative power of the Supervisory Committee is divided into three parts,namely,the power of investigating disciplinary investigations,the power of investigating illegal duties,and the power of investigating duty crimes,of which the investigative power of duty crimes is a vital component.The legalization and humanization of the supervisory committee’s investigative power of duty crime greatly affect the effectiveness of the reform of the supervisory system.It is necessary to study the operation of the supervisory committee’s investigative power of duty crime from the legislative and practical level.The legalization and humanization of the supervisory committee’s investigative power of duty crime greatly affect the effectiveness of the reform of the supervisory system.It is necessary to study the operation of the supervisory committee’s investigative power of duty crime from the legislative and practical level.The "Supervision Law" has been in effect in China for more than two year,and it sets out the basic principles and working procedures for the Supervision Committee to exercise its power to investigate duty crimes.In order to ensure the smooth implementation of the investigation by the Supervisory Committee,the Supervisory Committee is empowered to take 12 kinds of investigative measures,and 11 kinds of investigative measures can be taken in addition to talks when investigating cases of duty crime.However,due to inadequate toplevel design and lack of practical experience,the supervisory committee’s power of investigating duty crimes has also exposed some theoretical and practical issues,including inconsistent filing procedures,lien measures to be standardized,incomplete protection of the rights of the respondent,and inadequate connection between powers of duty crime investigation and criminal proceedings,and the inadequate supervision mechanism for the power of investigating duty crimes by the supervisory committee.Based on the actual situation of the power of investigating duty crimes in China’s Supervisory Committee,this article uses a comparative research method to investigate the anti-corruption agencies and the relevant systems of investigations of official crimes in Germany,Japan,the United States,Singapore and Hong Kong,and summarize some feasible and useful experiences.First,improve the anticorruption legal system;second,maintain the relative independence of the investigative power of duty crimes;third,establish a professional investigation team;and finally,strengthen supervision of the power to investigate duty crimes.Based on the question of the power of investigating duty crimes in the Supervisory Committee of China and drawing on the experience of foreign countries and Hong Kong in China,this article attempts to make some suggestions for the operation of the power of investigating duty crimes in the Supervisory Committee.It mainly includes: establishing the concept of balancing the fight against corruption and protecting human rights;establishing a dynamic dual system of monitoring and filing cases;regulating the operation procedures of lien measures from multiple perspectives;improving the rights protection mechanism of the respondent at multiple levels;the linking mechanism between investigative power and criminal proceedings;improving the supervision mechanism for the operation of the investigative power of the supervisory committee.