| Author |
Message |
smurfette
PopStar
Joined: Nov 07, 2003
Posts: 1287
Location: smurf village
|
 Posted:
July 29, 2004 - 09:03 AM |
 
|
| Post subject: Sigh, what else? |
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FG28Ad04.html
The Chinese audit that went nowhere
By Wang Chu
HONG KONG - Since it took office in March 2003, the reformist administration of President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao has encountered the age-old challenge that has always confronted leaders of conviction and vision: inefficient enforcement of the law - and disdain for the rule of law.
Some China observers attribute the problem to two major causes: first, officialdom itself has only a feeble notion of the rule of law, what it means and that no one should be above it; second, fierce resistance emanates from powerful in-groups, common in both central and local governments and dedicated to protecting their vested interests in power and financial gain.
It has been more than a month since June 23, when China's National Audit Office released its comprehensive 2003 audit report, unearthing malfeasance and inefficiencies across the board in the governmental establishment. As yet, few problem departments have made any positive responses to the report. None has issued an open statement of apology or acknowledgement of responsibility nor has any promised to rectify its work in the future.
Observers said that some significant problem areas were linked to the supporters of former president Jiang Zemin, currently chairman of the Chinese Communist Party's powerful Central Military Commission. Many of his supporters, known as the Shanghai Clique, oppose some of the economic and political reforms that would curb their wealth and influence.
In one instance, the audit report found that since 1999 the General Administration of Sport (GAS) has misused and rechanneled a total of 131 million yuan (US$15.8 million) of the ad hoc fund of the Chinese Olympic Committee, of which 109 million yuan was spent on housing staff members and 22 million on granting allowances to staff members or loans to subordinate departments for investment. In reply to the allegation, GAS on July 6 told the People's Daily, an official Chinese mouthpiece, that the audit report was true, but suggested that the allowances not be canceled until after the 2008 Olympics to be held in Beijing.
It is possible that GAS officials do not see the necessity of accounting for the misuse of funds that in fact served the welfare of its staff members and professional athletes; it is possible they do not consider it corruption. The case shows, however, that they have no regard for the law.
NDRC flouts reforms
In another case, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) budgeted 30.45 billion yuan for domestic infrastructure investment in 2003, pursuant to the audit report. In the first place, NDRC issued a grant of 22.83 billion yuan of the budget to local infrastructure investments, illegally leaving 7.61 billion yuan in reserve, the audit report said. Of the grant, only 17.34 billion yuan or 57% of the annual budget were utilized to finance projects. Still, some investment projects had to be altered in the process.
It should be made clear that not all appropriations are related to graft or misuse of funds. But NDRC has not rendered an accounting. Perhaps, it shares the same logic with GAS: no corruption, no need to accept responsibility or to be accountable.
There are many accusations against local officials who denied procedural justice to the people and consequently got implicated in breaches of duty or corruption-related crimes. As Asia Times Online's Chinese-language website previously reported, the authorities in western China's Yunnan province, responsible for disaster relief after the Dayao earthquake last August, were accused in the audit report of "embezzling the appropriation for disaster relief". In addition, these officials torn down local people's homes without due legal process and subcontracted the reconstruction work to constructors working hand-in-glove with the powerful, well-off figures. A large sum of relief appropriation was retained by the local government and has not yet been released to bona fide disaster victims.
In Jixi city in northeastern China's Heilongjiang province, the government failed to make due payment of tens of millions of yuan to contractors, who in turn, stalled payments to migrant workers for years. In early 2004, the case received attention from Premier Wen Jiabao who ordered officials to promptly address the problem. Nonetheless, local officials later defied the order and submitted a fabricated report to higher authorities, sources said.
The biggest issue now is that corrupt officials throughout the country have formed many interests groups. They obstinately collaborate to resist any challenge, justified or not, to their vested interests.
This is the toughest test facing the pro-reform Hu-Wen administration, determined to further the ongoing economic and political reform and address injustices against the people. Local officials, who in theory should always dance to the tune of the central government, often flout the orders from Beijing for the sake of personal gains - usually illegal.
Malady of balking bureaucrats
According to China experts, the malady has been ingrained in China's long civilized history. For the past two millenniums, dynasties and regimes have succeeded one another, while efforts to pursue reforms were usually nullified by interest groups in the establishment.
One of the important reasons lies in China's long history of the bureaucratic government. It is generally believed that the bureaucratic system was established by China's first emperor Qingshihuang between 221 and 210 BC, some 2,200 years ago. Then, the emperor designated officials, sent them out across the entire empire and ruled as the representative from the central government. Yet, such an advanced system installed prematurely can have many negative effects in China, and this can explain some bureaucratic problems facing the country today.
The emperor in a feudal society was the paramount leader of the country with everyone at his command. Still, most emperors found enormous opposition whenever they carried out reforms against the bureaucracy. Zhao Xu, the sixth emperor in the Song Dynasty (960-1279), introduced the Xining Reform, led by a hard-line reformist Wang Anshi in 1069, who soon found himself isolated and the reform strongly opposed by his colleagues. Only eight years later, the reform was aborted and everything that changed was restored to the old system. Several hundred years later came the famous short-lived Wuxu Reform in 1898 (Qing Dynasty, 1644-1911), which only lasted 103 days due to stiff resistance from obstinate mandarins, who felt their vested interests were threatened.
Political pundits suggest that the essence of Chinese bureaucracy has largely remained unchanged, even though some 2,400 years have passed since its inception. The country lacks a democratic system or independent press that can serve as tools to supervise the bureaucracy and promote improvements in the work of bureaucrats.
In developed Western countries with various checks on officials in place, elements in the bureaucratic system will usually endeavor to maximize the common interests shared by them and the masses. For instance, if the country achieves economic lift-off, the people can enjoy a better life and the government collects more taxes. Consequently, officials will often see their wages lifted. On the contrary, there are few shared interests between the ruling and the ruled in China now. The only check on officials' behavior is their conscience, which often is deficient.
It is obvious now that various interest groups are taking shape among the officials, creating major obstacles to reform and social stability. Beijing should introduce checks and balances on the bureaucracy and force those in power to find their shared and common interests with those they rule - or China's stability and sustained economic growth cannot be achieved.
>>>>>>
As I tried to tell before, the problem is that they did not feel anything wrong with that! It's not even corruption. And history could not serve as any excuse, the vested interest is the eternal root reason.
Will the reform go on and finally achieve anything new or just die out as historical one? |
_________________
statistically significant |
|
|
|
peterpaul
Barker
Joined: Jan 27, 2004
Posts: 169
Status: Offline
|
| Posted:
July 29, 2004 - 01:06 PM |
|
|
Well, while the vocabulary for the position has changed (mid-level cadre instead of mandarin), it is nice to know that the underlying "principles" are still in tact and resilient in the face of change. Cheer up, perhaps the West will finally kowtow to China and start to operate more like the Central Kingdom... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Preferences
Watched Topics
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
