Recently, the Legislative Affairs Committee of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress disclosed such a case in this annual "legal examination" report: some municipal district deliberation and coordination bodies issued a notice to take punitive measures against key persons involved in certain types of crimes, including restrictions on the rights of spouses, children, parents and other close relatives of key persons involved in crimes in education, employment, social security, etc.
Some citizens have made a review suggestion that the implementation should be stopped. The Legislative Affairs Committee of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress found that this provision violated the rules, and urged the relevant departments to repeal the circular, and supported the relevant competent departments to deploy and carry out self-examination and self-correction nationwide, to prevent and avoid similar situations, and to ensure that law enforcement and judicial work is standardized and advanced on the track of the rule of law.
While applauding the Legislative Affairs Committee of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress for stopping the practice of "Zhulian", the issue of "children of criminals are not allowed to take public examinations" of a similar nature has once again aroused the attention and discussion of the people: Does this restriction also belong to "Zhulian" and should it be abolished?
In the current political and social environment, restrictions on the children of convicts are a controversial topic. Some consider such restrictions to be discriminatory against the children of offenders and contrary to the principles of fairness and justice;Others, on the other hand, believe that such restrictions are for the sake of maintaining social stability and public order and good morals.
First, we should recognize that the restrictions faced by the children of convicts in public examinations are not unique to China. Similar restrictions exist in many countries around the world. These restrictive measures are usually based on the following considerations: first, to prevent the children of offenders from using their public positions to seek improper benefits for the family;The second is to avoid the possible moral hazard of the children of criminals in public office;The third is to maintain social stability and public order and good customs.
However, we need to think deeply about whether such restrictions should be lifted or not. On the one hand, the removal of restrictions can reduce discrimination against the children of offenders and reflect the principle of fairness and justice. At the same time, it can also inject more vitality and creativity into society. But on the other hand, if we lift restrictions, it can bring with it a whole range of problems and challenges. For example, how to ensure that the children of offenders have the qualities and abilities to hold public office?How can we prevent them from taking advantage of their positions to seek improper benefits for their families?How to maintain social stability and public order and good customs?Kunpeng Project