论文部分内容阅读
海南省等地方政府行政首长问责制度主要内容包括问责主体、问责对象、问责内容和实现机制。它的特点是问责主体与问责对象行政隶属关系的明晰,构成了典型的等级问责关系;问责内容广泛,涉及等级问责、职业问责、法律问责和政治问责等内容;通过直接界定和参照执行的方式确定了两类问责对象;单一的政府行政负责人启动机制,决定了问责的行政内部垂直领导的实现途径。这一制度设计的缺陷及影响是:由“单一问责主体和启动机制可以实现多类问责内容的问责效果”的假设难以成立,引发问责效果难以实现的问题;由“地方党委书记不过问行政问责”的假设不成立,导致问责执行中可能存在的党政冲突问题;由“‘部门行政首长’和‘政府行政首长’在决策权力与责任方面一致”的假设不成立,带来的对政府行政首长决策责任如何界定及合理问责的问题;由“体制外信息提供者可以充分获取必要的信息和行使相应的权力”的假设不成立,带来的监督者难以到位的问题。
The main contents of the accountability system of the executive heads of local governments in Hainan include the main body of accountability, the object of accountability, the content of accountability and the realization mechanism. It is characterized by the clarity of the administrative affiliation between the subject of accountability and the object of accountability, which constitutes a typical level of accountability. The scope of accountability is broad and involves such issues as level accountability, professional accountability, legal accountability and political accountability. Two types of objects of accountability were identified through the direct definition and reference of implementation. The single initiation mechanism of the government chief executive determined the way for the vertical leadership within the administrative accountability. The flaw and the impact of this system design are: the hypothesis of “the accountability effect of multiple types of accountability that can be achieved by a single subject of accountability and initiation mechanism” is difficult to set up, and the issue of accountability is hard to come by; However, the assumption of administrative accountability “is not true, leading to the possible conflict between party and government in the implementation of accountability. The assumption of” consistency between the “executive heads of departments and government chiefs in decision making power and responsibility” The question of how to define the responsibilities of government executive heads and how to properly account for their accountability; the assumption that “the information providers outside the system can fully obtain the necessary information and exercise the corresponding powers” does not hold the assumption that the supervisors can not be put in place.