In the public ***, the political review link has always been a matter of much attention. Many candidates believe that as long as they pass the interview, the political examination process is just a formality, and there is not much difficulty. However, this is not the case. Many candidates encountered accidents during the political examination, resulting in the final inability to be hired. One of the common problems is kinship crimes. In the political examination regulations, if the candidate's direct blood relatives or collateral blood relatives who have a greater influence on the candidates have been sentenced to death or are serving prison sentences, the candidates will be judged to be unqualified in the political examination. In some cases, the crime committed by the candidate's relatives may not directly affect the candidate himself, but according to the provisions of the political examination, some indirect relationships may also become unqualified factors in the political examination.
The frequent occurrence of accidents in the political review process has attracted widespread attention and discussion. Many people have questioned whether the crime of relatives should affect the candidate's recruitment results. They believe that children cannot control the behavior of their parents and that the fault of parents should not be passed on to their children. Some people also believe that the practice of joint political trials is similar to "one person makes a mistake and the whole family is punished" and does not conform to the principles of fairness and reasonableness.
But there are also those who disagree. They believe that the premise of not benefiting children is that they will not benefit their children and grandchildren. Restricting the rights of persons involved in crimes and their relatives can have a certain deterrent effect and reduce the occurrence of criminal acts. Both the candidate and his or her family members should be held accountable for the consequences and effects of the criminal act.
1. Legal perspective
Whether the political trial joint sitting is reasonable and compliant needs to be analyzed from a legal perspective. On the one hand, the joint political examination is carried out in accordance with the current Civil Servants Law and the provisions on political examination, and has a legal basis. On the other hand, the joint political trial involves the balance of individual rights and interests and the protection of public interests. As a public service organization, the agency needs to ensure the integrity and integrity of its employees, as well as its responsibility for social stability and integrity. Therefore, as a preventive measure, the joint sitting of political examination can reasonably protect the quality and conduct of civil servants.
2. Fairness and reasonableness
From the perspective of fairness and reasonableness, there are still some controversies about the political trial. After all, even relatives should not lose all the opportunities for personal pursuit of their careers because of the actions of others. For candidates, they cannot influence the behavior of their relatives, but they have to pay for the mistakes of their relatives. In this case, it seems a little unfair to sit in a political trial.
As a strict assessment measure, the purpose of the joint examination is to ensure the integrity and quality of the civil service. However, in practice, the political trial has also caused a series of problems and controversies. To solve these problems, we can consider the following aspects:
1. The reasonableness of the political review standards
The political examination standards need to be more scientific and reasonable, and reduce unnecessary interference to the candidates and their relatives. The outcome of the political examination should be determined according to the nature and extent of the criminal act, so as to avoid unfair judgment of the candidate due to some minor indirect relationship.
2. Fair procedures and authoritative institutions
The political review process needs to ensure the fairness and authority of the procedure. ** Institutions should establish a special political review body, formulate specific political review standards and procedures, and ensure that the results of the political review are fair and transparent. The political trial process should be conducted through a professional judicial body, rather than by the relevant ** department, so as to avoid the influence of arbitrary and subjective factors.
3. Effectively protect the rights and interests of candidates
The purpose of the political examination joint is to ensure the integrity and integrity of the civil service, not to sacrifice the personal rights and development opportunities of candidates. **A sound compensation mechanism should be established to ensure that candidates who are affected by the political examination receive fair compensation and opportunities. In the event of an accident during the political examination, candidates should have the right to appeal and appeal in order to protect their legitimate rights and interests.
In short, the higher the call for the abolition of "political trial and joint sitting" in the public government, the greater the opposition, and there are indeed some problems in terms of rationality and fairness. While building a fair and transparent political examination system, it is also necessary to pay more attention to and protect the personal rights and interests of candidates. Only with the joint efforts of all parties can we make the public service more fair and just, and attract more outstanding talents to join the public undertakings.