Mao Kaiyun the vocative case responsibility is no more cruel than why Sohu review-zghd

Mao Kaiyun the vocative case responsibility is no more cruel than why Sohu review-zghd

June 4, 2018
/ / /
Comments Closed

Mao Kaiyun: the vocative case responsibility "is no more cruel than why? Sohu – Comments on 1 day at 0 o’clock in the morning, the unjust case responsibility vocative Hu Ge Ji Le Tu to the public, the relevant departments of the the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region public security system of 27 people responsible for the misjudged case responsibility. The reporters found that in addition to the new city when he was deputy director of the Hohhot Municipal Public Security Bureau Public Security Bureau Feng Zhiming alleged crimes dealt with, other personnel were administrative correctly, party a serious warning and other sanctions. The parents think: such vocative Hu Ge Ji Le Tu accountable results, there is no more cruel. (February 1st "Beijing Youth Daily") vocative of the innocent, but eventually no life. The price for this life with him accountable for results, more parents say such vocative responsibility there is no more cruel ", is the ordinary people it seems it is difficult to convince the public. The public security system are organized by the staff at only the vocative case, 1 people suspected of crimes? There should be at least 3 people. Those who torture on torture, vocative fraud, crime people are gone? I only suspected crimes? The central injunctions to let people feel from every judicial case to justice, fairness and justice of the responsibility of the vocative case where? Vocative case is the sensational miscarriages of justice, the case responsibility also such a result, whether the other case responsibility will become a disguised compliment? The parents did not want him, responsibility all the investigators, but the organizers of the case should be accountable. 27 people were accountable, feel the responsibility is the average force, more feeling of this responsibility is a form of "fabuzezhong". This cursory accountable to those cases organized by the staff to realize the mistake? Even the responsibility are not held in place, they can try to run the case? It is particularly fantastic is the vocative case from the vindication of so far, no one sector to apologize, no one to him parents say "sorry", which in the circumstances in the law is afraid justified. Of course, the vocative case was executed for 18 years. 18 years, the responsibility to make everyone satisfied is difficult. But it said "sorry"? The organizers announced the case can be? In the case of the organizers can be accountable? Besides, accountable, the reason for 27 people, according to what is the evidence? Can be released? Procuratorate reception staff had told the vocative parents, accountable results will be the first time to notify the family, but according to the report published for nearly 8 hours, the family has not been informed of the relevant departments, this is not a bad faith? The judicial personnel of bad faith, the damage is not only the parties, is the credibility of the judiciary and the image of the party and the government. "The science of legislation, strict law enforcement, justice and universal law" is the core of the whole rule of law. In the vocative case, which is accountable to departments in the office, there is no need to start a higher level of responsibility? The organizers is accountable vocative case, the relevant personnel accountability department. Vocative case has been accomplishing iron case, vocative case responsibility must also do tiean, must stand the test of time and history. The Cayenne.

毛开云:呼格案追责为啥“有比没有更残忍”?-搜狐评论  1日凌晨零时许,呼格吉勒图冤案追责结果向公众公布,有关部门对内蒙古自治区公检法系统对该错案负有责任的27人进行了追责。记者发现,除时任呼和浩特市公安局新城区公安分局副局长冯志明因涉嫌职务犯罪另案处理外,其他人员均获行政记错、党内严重警告等处分。呼格吉勒图的父母认为:这样的追责结果,有比没有更残忍。(2月1日《北京青年报》)  呼格本无罪,最终却没了生命。呼格用生命的代价换来这个追责结果,不止呼格的父母说这样的追责“有比没有更残忍”,就是常人看来也很难服众。  公检法系统都有呼格案主办人员,咋只有1人涉嫌职务犯罪?至少应该有3人吧。那些对呼格严刑逼供的人、造假的人、立功的人,都去哪里了?咋就仅仅涉嫌职务犯罪?中央三令五申,要让群众从每一个司法案件中感受到公平正义,呼格案追责的公平正义在哪里?呼格案是轰动全国的冤假错案,这种案件的追责也是这么一种结果,其他案件的追责是否会变成一种变相的褒奖?  呼格的父母说得好,并非要追责所有办案人员,但对此案的主办人员无疑应该追责。27人被追责,感觉这种追责是平均用力,更感觉这种追责是变相的“法不责众”。这种浮皮潦草的追责,能让当年那些案件主办人员认识到错误吗?连责任都没追究到位,以后他们能尽力办好案吗?特别令人匪夷所思的是,呼格案从平反至今,没有一个部门登门道歉,没有一个人给呼格的父母说一声“对不起”,这于情于理于法恐怕都说不过去。  当然,呼格被执行死刑已有18年。18年物是人非,追责结果要让所有人满意确实有难度。但是,说一声“对不起”有多难?公布案件主办人员可以吗?对案件主办人员进行追责可以吗?再说,对27人进行追责的理由、证据、依据是什么?可以公布吗?检察院接待人员曾告诉呼格父母,出了追责结果会第一时间通知家属,但报道称结果公布近8个小时,家属未得到有关部门的通知,这是不是不守信用?司法人员不守信用,伤害的不仅是当事人,更是司法公信以及党和政府形象。  “科学立法、严格执法、公正司法、全民守法”是全面依法治国的核心。在呼格案中,追责是哪些部门在办,有没有必要启动更高级别的追责?既追责呼格案的主办人员,也追责部门的相关人员。呼格案已经办成铁案,呼格案追责也必须办成铁案,必须经得起时间和历史的检验。  文 毛开云相关的主题文章:

Comments are closed.