The results of the investigation of the "Arctic Catfish" show off of wealth incident were alleged not to be made public official response
(Original title: Investigation for half a year, the results of the "Arctic Catfish" incident will not be made public? Official response to top news)
"So much money in my family is provided by leeks, I can go to whichever country I want to go, we all eat king crab Bolong, and fat pigs are only worthy of eating swill for the New Year." In March this year, after a netizen who was an "Arctic catfish" posted several times to show off his wealth, multiple departments in Shenzhen announced their involvement in the investigation.
Weibo screenshot of "Arctic Catfish"
Weibo screenshot of "Arctic Catfish"
Now that the investigation has been nearly half a year, it has been rumored on the Internet that the final result of the Shenzhen Municipal Transport Bureau's response to the "Arctic Catfish" incident is "not to be made public". The news was exposed, causing heated discussions among netizens, and some netizens questioned whether it is true that the investigation was 'not made public' for half a year?" ”
On September 14, the relevant staff of the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau responded to the top news reporter, saying, "In response to the 'Arctic Catfish' incident and the situation of 'not disclosed' circulating on the Internet, we will register feedback, and the specific handling results will be replied within 15 working days." ”
The granddaughter of Shenzhen's former transportation bureau chief flaunted her wealth, and many local departments began investigating in March
The suspected official "non-public" reply letter brought many netizens who were concerned about this matter into the "Shenzhen Arctic Catfish" incident again.
In March this year, netizens "Arctic Catfish", whose IP address showed as Australia, posted online that his home deposits now exceed 9 figures, and that his grandfather served as the director of the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation.
"So much of my family's money is provided by leeks, and I only know that my family's deposit is 9 figures." The "Arctic Catfish" also posted a group photo of his grandfather attending the "Shenzhen Administrative College Civil Service Qualification Training Course".
At the same time, many netizens' screenshots show that the "Arctic Catfish" also said words that were suspected of insulting Chinese people many times during the dialogue between netizens.
As things fermented, the grandfather of "Arctic Catfish" said in an interview with the media that he had served as the director of the Shenzhen city-level bureau, but the news that the savings at home exceeded 9 figures was untrue.
At the same time, the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transport also issued a notice on this matter, saying that it had taken note of the relevant remarks released by the families of retired cadres on the Internet, and on March 24, the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation had verified the relevant information and would promptly report the relevant situation.
The Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation previously issued a circular
For the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau to respond to this matter so quickly, many netizens praised "This is the speed of Shenzhen, looking forward to the day when the results of the survey are released." ”
After nearly half a year, many departments in Shenzhen have repeatedly responded to "please wait for the briefing"
On April 26, it has been more than a month since the "circular" issued by the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation intervened in the investigation, at that time, the top news reporter learned from the relevant staff of the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau that the investigation of the "Arctic Catfish" has not yet announced the latest progress, "Whether it is our unit or other relevant units, we are indeed paying attention to this matter, but there is still no result, if you want to know us about this matter, In the past month of investigation and final processing results, we will also have someone to dock with you later. The staff member said. However, as of September 14, no relevant staff of the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau had contacted top news reporters on this matter.
On June 29, in response to the "Arctic Catfish" incident, the Shenzhen Transport Bureau still did not issue any relevant information report, and the investigation time has exceeded 100 days, Shangguan News consulted the relevant department staff of Shenzhen on this matter, the staff said, "The Discipline Inspection Commission is still investigating this matter, there is no timetable, please wait patiently for the briefing." ”
On August 25, five months after the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau intervened in the investigation, the Dawan News reporter learned from the relevant staff of the Shenzhen Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision, "Please wait for the follow-up situation." ”
On September 10, People's Daily Shenzhen, People's Daily Online, Shenzhen released a reply letter to the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation on the open government information application, which mainly responded to the incident of Shenzhen's "granddaughter of the former transportation director" showing off her wealth. The reply letter reads: "After research, the information you applied for is not information produced or obtained by our bureau in the course of performing administrative functions, and does not belong to government information as referred to in Article 2 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Open Government Information. In accordance with the provisions of Article 36, Paragraph 3 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Open Government Information, our bureau has decided not to disclose it. ”
The reply letter of the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation on the open government information application was circulated online
On September 14, the top news reporter contacted the relevant staff of the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau again on this matter, and the staff member said, "In response to the 'Arctic Catfish' incident and the situation of 'not disclosed' circulating on the Internet, we will register feedback, and the specific handling results will be replied within 15 working days." ”
Lawyer: From a legal point of view, it is okay not to disclose it, but it may affect the credibility of the government
In the nearly half a year of waiting for netizens, the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau was exposed, and the relevant reply of "our bureau decided not to make it public" was exposed, and many netizens questioned whether the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau's move violated citizens' right to know information.
In response to the above-mentioned netizens' questions, Liu Ban of Shanghai Cooperative (Zhengzhou) Law Firm believes that "the above reply letter is only from a legal point of view, there is no problem. ”
In accordance with Article 2 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Open Government Information, "Government information" as used in these Regulations refers to information produced or obtained by administrative organs in the course of performing administrative management functions, and recorded and preserved in a certain form. It can be seen that disciplinary investigations and integrity investigations within the government against relevant officials (including retired officials) are not government information that can be applied for disclosure.
"However, given that this incident has aroused widespread public opinion, and the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation has previously stated that it will 'inform the public in a timely manner,' and now it is not disclosed, this may affect the credibility of the government." Liu Bao said.
Media commentary
Arctic Catfish case: "Not government information" ≠ case is not made public
How is the investigation of the "Arctic Catfish" case going? In March this year, netizens "Arctic Catfish" released a series of extreme remarks such as "there are 9 figures at home", family members "feel greedy" and "moist" to Australia, which aroused public attention, at that time, the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation announced that the grandfather of "Arctic Catfish" and retired cadre Zhong Moumou carried out inspections.
Some netizens applied to the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau for government information disclosure in response to the investigation of the case. At present, the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau said in its reply letter dated September 6: "The public information you applied for is not information produced or obtained by our bureau in the course of performing administrative functions, and does not belong to government information as referred to in Article 2 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Open Government Information... Our bureau has decided not to disclose it. ”
Many netizens questioned this: After 6 months of investigation, is it to tell everyone that it is "not public"? Is the whole thing going to be over?
It must be noted that not disclosing according to the "Open Government Information Regulations" is probably not what everyone thinks "it will never be disclosed again in the future". Because the Open Government Information Regulations, as an administrative regulation promulgated by the State Council, the definition of "government information" is quite strict. According to Article 2 of the Regulations, "government information" as used in these Regulations refers to information produced or obtained by administrative organs in the course of performing administrative management functions.
In other words, government information that citizens apply to disclose in accordance with the Open Government Information Regulations refers to information formed by administrative organs in the course of "performing administrative management functions". In this regard, disciplinary investigations and integrity investigations within the government against relevant officials (including retired officials) do not fall under the narrow sense of "performance of administrative management", and therefore do not belong to "government information" that can be applied for disclosure.
Therefore, at the "technical" level, there is no problem for the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Bureau to reply that "not disclosed". However, this "non-disclosure" does not mean that he "does not disclose it", does not disclose it as "government information" in a narrow sense, and does not mean that the conclusion of the investigation of retired cadre Zhong Moumou cannot be made public. In the era of comprehensively promoting the rule of law, whether or not government information is open or not must be handled in accordance with law; At the same time, we should insist on no forbidden areas, full coverage, and zero tolerance for anti-corruption, and we cannot use "government information" in a narrow sense to avoid normal supervision.
As early as March 24 this year, the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transport said that it had "verified the relevant information and will report the relevant situation in a timely manner". This is a solemn promise to all members of society: to investigate the facts and to give an account to the public. This is also a discipline inspection and supervision responsibility and a political responsibility that must be fulfilled.
The "Arctic Catfish" incident had a bad impact, and a young girl publicly disclosed that her relatives, who were the head of the district transportation bureau, were suspected of serious corruption, and used "leeks" to insult the masses, not only showing off wealth, but also allegedly insulting the country and the people. In any case, there must be a comprehensive investigation.
The Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation announced that it had launched an inspection, and after nearly half a year, the media contacted relevant departments in June, July and August this year, but none of them disclosed the progress of the case. This is why on August 23, netizens applied to the Shenzhen Municipal Bureau of Transportation for government information disclosure.
The investigation takes a certain amount of time, and it is understandable that the investigation is responsible for the reputation of Party members and cadres, as well as for the truth and the public's right to know, but a rigorous investigation cannot become a "broken change". "Open government information" in the narrow sense does not apply to internal investigations of officials. However, disclosure is the best antiseptic, and the disclosure of information on the "Arctic Catfish" case is not only a public commitment by the government department, but also a proper link in the anti-corruption investigation. Everyone is waiting for authoritative information disclosure.
