论文部分内容阅读
China will enhance cooperation with the international community to capture those who fled in fear of being investigated for corruption， according to Cao Jianming， Procurator General of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate， who made the remarks in a work report to this year’s full session of the National People’s Congress， China’s top legislature， on March 10.
“Preventing suspects from fleeing the country and tracing those who have escaped are important measures for prosecutors when fighting graft，” Cao said. “For example， those who are suspected of duty-related crimes and potentially attempting to flee abroad will be banned from leaving China quickly， and supervision of officials will be tightened.”
Duty-related crimes generally refer to offering and taking bribes and dereliction of duty. In China， procuratorial organs handle the investigation and prosecution of such crimes.
Cao said that prosecutors will work with judicial organs abroad to expand channels for tracking down those who have fled and to recover their ill-gotten gains.
Authorities will also start procedures to confiscate illegal assets of fugitives abroad. “Once evidence is sufficient， we’ll initiate confiscation procedures according to law，” Cao said.
Fleeing the country
On May 28， 2013， Cai Daoming， former Director of the Animal Husbandry and veterinary Bureau in Gong’an County， central China’s Hubei Province， left his office during a lunch break and never returned.
A month later， after failing to find any trace of him， the county decided to remove Cai from his position. Investigations into his whereabouts have failed to uncover any solid leads， and Internet users have been quick to speculate that Cai was involved in corrupt activities.
Similarly， Wang yanwei， Chairman of the Huadu District Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in Guangzhou， south China’s Guangdong Province， a local advisory body， asked for sick leave on June 3 last year and disappeared promptly.
Many officials involved in economic crimes， especially those involving large amounts of assets， have gone missing abroad. To make matters worse， the number of fugitives will likely increase as anti-corruption efforts intensify， according to a report issued by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in February.
Figures from the Supreme People’s Procuratorate show that money seized from fleeing officials increased fourfold from the 22.48 billion yuan （$3.59 billion） reclaimed in 2007 to 102.09 billion yuan （$16.31 billion） in 2012. A previous report from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences revealed that about 18，000 Chinese officials fled the country between 1995 and 2008， smuggling assets worth 800 billion yuan （$127.84 billion） with them.
Experts argue that the figure is actually only a small fraction of the absconded capital. Li Chengyan， Director of the Research Center for Clean Government Construction at Peking University， estimates that there are about 10，000 Chinese officials at large overseas with illegal assets worth more than 1 trillion yuan（$159.8 billion）.
Countries that are most favored among fleeing officials include the United States， Australia and Canada. Some Central American countries and island countries in the Pacific are also used as sanctuaries by corrupt officials.
In January， the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection of the Communist Party of China pledged to wage a systematic campaign against officials who flee overseas. This has included new regulations that block “naked officials” from promotion.
Naked officials is a term that has been coined to refer to civil servants whose spouses or children have migrated overseas and are therefore most likely to be the potential recipients of illicit funds from within China. These officials usually use their foreign family connections to illegally transfer assets or avoid investigations.
International barriers
In September last year， Gao Shan， a fugitive in a financial fraud case who surrendered to the police in 2012， stood trial with six other suspects at a court in northeast China’s Heilongjiang Province.
Gao， former head of a branch of the Bank of China in Harbin， capital of Heilongjiang， was charged with collaborating with the other suspects on planning and executing a fraud between 2000 and 2004， which led to a loss of 1 billion yuan （$159.8 million）.
Gao fled to Canada at the end of 2004 before the case was exposed. In 2007， local police arrested Gao， who had become a Canadian citizen. In 2012， he voluntarily turned himself in to the Chinese police.
Since 2007， via extradition， repatriation or persuasion， several fugitives with similar stories to Gao have been sent from Canada， the United States and the Republic of Korea to China after years on the run.
With international cooperation， Xu Chaofan and Xu Guojun， both former heads of the Bank of China Kaiping Branch in Guangdong， stood trial in the United States and were sentenced to up to 25 years in jail in 2009. In spite of the achievements， top procurator Cao acknowledged that due to the political and legal hurdles involved in extradition， collection of evidence and application of the death penalty， Chinese judicial officers face challenges in capturing fugitives and the proceeds of their crimes.
Earlier this year， the Ministry of Public Security said that China has more than 500 economic fugitives abroad， most of them in the United States， Canada and Southeast Asian countries.
The countries and regions where the fugitives have gone have one thing in common—a track record of weak cooperation with China， according to Liao Jinrong， Director of the International Cooperation Bureau under the MPS. “They know that once they get there， especially to the United States and Canada， it will be very difficult for us to bring them back for trial，” he said.
As of May 2013， China had signed extradition treaties with 36 countries and judicial assistance agreements with 49 countries.
China is yet to sign extradition treaties with the United States or Canada. “Plus， the judiciary in North America tends to be prejudiced against China’s judiciary and procedures and are reluctant to assist in the repatriation of fugitives，”Liao said.
With the aim of boosting cooperation， China has been sending police liaison officers abroad since 1998. Today， the country has 80 officers stationed at 24 Chinese embassies in 23 countries， including the United States， Canada， Russia， France and Japan. The officers do not have judicial powers， so they must rely on the help of local police to investigate and obtain evidence.
“Police liaison officers work on the front line and serve as the best bridge between Chinese judicial bodies and foreign counterparts，” Liao said.
However， Wang Zhigang， a Chinese police liaison officer in the United States from 2004-08， said that legal differences， as well as complex and lengthy procedures， remain the biggest hurdles to finding and returning Chinese fugitives from North America.
Wang said that more than 200 economic fugitives were at large in the United States during his tenure in the country and he was one of only three officers charged with bringing them back.
According to Wang， it usually took three to five years to repatriate an economic crime fugitive after constant communication with U.S. judicial authorities. “First， we had to submit detailed case files， including warrants issued by Interpol， to the FBI and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement， and request their assistance，” he said. However， the U.S. side did not further investigate the alleged crimes， Wang explained. “Only if the fugitives were suspected of illegal immigration or money laundering， and after grasping solid evidence， would U.S. police consider detaining and charging them under local law.”
Meanwhile， fugitives often appealed to higher courts and hired attorneys to delay the hearing， all of which slowed the repatriation process， Wang said.
Focusing on prevention
Experts have called on authorities to put greater emphasis on preventing corrupt officials from leaving China.
Li Lin， a member of the Beijing Lawyers Association， suggests that the Party’s discipline watchdogs and procuratorial authorities should widen channels to collect intelligence. “Once there are signs that a corrupt official might flee， timely measures must be taken， such as freezing their assets and border checks，” Li said.
Lin Zhe， an anti-corruption expert at the Party School of the Communist Party of China Central Committee， said that the lack of confidentiality when investigations are being conducted provides opportunities for these officials to be alerted.
“It may be caused by accidental leaks，”Lin said. “But some officials who have connec- tions with the subjects of investigations are leaking secrets intentionally as they can shirk their responsibilities and avoid being penalized. Thorough investigations should be conducted to find out who should be held accountable for letting corrupt officials escape.”
According to Lin， for suspicious officials， such as those who are frequently reported by citizens， authorities should strengthen control over them and restrict them from travelling abroad.
Highlighting the importance of setting up a sound system to prevent officials from fleeing， Li yongzhong， Deputy Director of the China Discipline Inspection and Supervision Institute， said that authorities should pay attention to the activities of officials’ families and changes to their bank accounts or property details to get clues on when they are planning to make an escape.
Lin noted that banks should participate in the process by monitoring and reporting on suspicious bank accounts， as officials transfer their assets overseas before fleeing.
“The ineffective supervision and the lack of a complete system to restrict officials from escaping have made this problem persistent for many years，” Lin said， adding that if things cannot be done， it is because some involved in the system don’t want them to be done.
“Preventing suspects from fleeing the country and tracing those who have escaped are important measures for prosecutors when fighting graft，” Cao said. “For example， those who are suspected of duty-related crimes and potentially attempting to flee abroad will be banned from leaving China quickly， and supervision of officials will be tightened.”
Duty-related crimes generally refer to offering and taking bribes and dereliction of duty. In China， procuratorial organs handle the investigation and prosecution of such crimes.
Cao said that prosecutors will work with judicial organs abroad to expand channels for tracking down those who have fled and to recover their ill-gotten gains.
Authorities will also start procedures to confiscate illegal assets of fugitives abroad. “Once evidence is sufficient， we’ll initiate confiscation procedures according to law，” Cao said.
Fleeing the country
On May 28， 2013， Cai Daoming， former Director of the Animal Husbandry and veterinary Bureau in Gong’an County， central China’s Hubei Province， left his office during a lunch break and never returned.
A month later， after failing to find any trace of him， the county decided to remove Cai from his position. Investigations into his whereabouts have failed to uncover any solid leads， and Internet users have been quick to speculate that Cai was involved in corrupt activities.
Similarly， Wang yanwei， Chairman of the Huadu District Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference in Guangzhou， south China’s Guangdong Province， a local advisory body， asked for sick leave on June 3 last year and disappeared promptly.
Many officials involved in economic crimes， especially those involving large amounts of assets， have gone missing abroad. To make matters worse， the number of fugitives will likely increase as anti-corruption efforts intensify， according to a report issued by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in February.
Figures from the Supreme People’s Procuratorate show that money seized from fleeing officials increased fourfold from the 22.48 billion yuan （$3.59 billion） reclaimed in 2007 to 102.09 billion yuan （$16.31 billion） in 2012. A previous report from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences revealed that about 18，000 Chinese officials fled the country between 1995 and 2008， smuggling assets worth 800 billion yuan （$127.84 billion） with them.
Experts argue that the figure is actually only a small fraction of the absconded capital. Li Chengyan， Director of the Research Center for Clean Government Construction at Peking University， estimates that there are about 10，000 Chinese officials at large overseas with illegal assets worth more than 1 trillion yuan（$159.8 billion）.
Countries that are most favored among fleeing officials include the United States， Australia and Canada. Some Central American countries and island countries in the Pacific are also used as sanctuaries by corrupt officials.
In January， the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection of the Communist Party of China pledged to wage a systematic campaign against officials who flee overseas. This has included new regulations that block “naked officials” from promotion.
Naked officials is a term that has been coined to refer to civil servants whose spouses or children have migrated overseas and are therefore most likely to be the potential recipients of illicit funds from within China. These officials usually use their foreign family connections to illegally transfer assets or avoid investigations.
International barriers
In September last year， Gao Shan， a fugitive in a financial fraud case who surrendered to the police in 2012， stood trial with six other suspects at a court in northeast China’s Heilongjiang Province.
Gao， former head of a branch of the Bank of China in Harbin， capital of Heilongjiang， was charged with collaborating with the other suspects on planning and executing a fraud between 2000 and 2004， which led to a loss of 1 billion yuan （$159.8 million）.
Gao fled to Canada at the end of 2004 before the case was exposed. In 2007， local police arrested Gao， who had become a Canadian citizen. In 2012， he voluntarily turned himself in to the Chinese police.
Since 2007， via extradition， repatriation or persuasion， several fugitives with similar stories to Gao have been sent from Canada， the United States and the Republic of Korea to China after years on the run.
With international cooperation， Xu Chaofan and Xu Guojun， both former heads of the Bank of China Kaiping Branch in Guangdong， stood trial in the United States and were sentenced to up to 25 years in jail in 2009. In spite of the achievements， top procurator Cao acknowledged that due to the political and legal hurdles involved in extradition， collection of evidence and application of the death penalty， Chinese judicial officers face challenges in capturing fugitives and the proceeds of their crimes.
Earlier this year， the Ministry of Public Security said that China has more than 500 economic fugitives abroad， most of them in the United States， Canada and Southeast Asian countries.
The countries and regions where the fugitives have gone have one thing in common—a track record of weak cooperation with China， according to Liao Jinrong， Director of the International Cooperation Bureau under the MPS. “They know that once they get there， especially to the United States and Canada， it will be very difficult for us to bring them back for trial，” he said.
As of May 2013， China had signed extradition treaties with 36 countries and judicial assistance agreements with 49 countries.
China is yet to sign extradition treaties with the United States or Canada. “Plus， the judiciary in North America tends to be prejudiced against China’s judiciary and procedures and are reluctant to assist in the repatriation of fugitives，”Liao said.
With the aim of boosting cooperation， China has been sending police liaison officers abroad since 1998. Today， the country has 80 officers stationed at 24 Chinese embassies in 23 countries， including the United States， Canada， Russia， France and Japan. The officers do not have judicial powers， so they must rely on the help of local police to investigate and obtain evidence.
“Police liaison officers work on the front line and serve as the best bridge between Chinese judicial bodies and foreign counterparts，” Liao said.
However， Wang Zhigang， a Chinese police liaison officer in the United States from 2004-08， said that legal differences， as well as complex and lengthy procedures， remain the biggest hurdles to finding and returning Chinese fugitives from North America.
Wang said that more than 200 economic fugitives were at large in the United States during his tenure in the country and he was one of only three officers charged with bringing them back.
According to Wang， it usually took three to five years to repatriate an economic crime fugitive after constant communication with U.S. judicial authorities. “First， we had to submit detailed case files， including warrants issued by Interpol， to the FBI and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement， and request their assistance，” he said. However， the U.S. side did not further investigate the alleged crimes， Wang explained. “Only if the fugitives were suspected of illegal immigration or money laundering， and after grasping solid evidence， would U.S. police consider detaining and charging them under local law.”
Meanwhile， fugitives often appealed to higher courts and hired attorneys to delay the hearing， all of which slowed the repatriation process， Wang said.
Focusing on prevention
Experts have called on authorities to put greater emphasis on preventing corrupt officials from leaving China.
Li Lin， a member of the Beijing Lawyers Association， suggests that the Party’s discipline watchdogs and procuratorial authorities should widen channels to collect intelligence. “Once there are signs that a corrupt official might flee， timely measures must be taken， such as freezing their assets and border checks，” Li said.
Lin Zhe， an anti-corruption expert at the Party School of the Communist Party of China Central Committee， said that the lack of confidentiality when investigations are being conducted provides opportunities for these officials to be alerted.
“It may be caused by accidental leaks，”Lin said. “But some officials who have connec- tions with the subjects of investigations are leaking secrets intentionally as they can shirk their responsibilities and avoid being penalized. Thorough investigations should be conducted to find out who should be held accountable for letting corrupt officials escape.”
According to Lin， for suspicious officials， such as those who are frequently reported by citizens， authorities should strengthen control over them and restrict them from travelling abroad.
Highlighting the importance of setting up a sound system to prevent officials from fleeing， Li yongzhong， Deputy Director of the China Discipline Inspection and Supervision Institute， said that authorities should pay attention to the activities of officials’ families and changes to their bank accounts or property details to get clues on when they are planning to make an escape.
Lin noted that banks should participate in the process by monitoring and reporting on suspicious bank accounts， as officials transfer their assets overseas before fleeing.
“The ineffective supervision and the lack of a complete system to restrict officials from escaping have made this problem persistent for many years，” Lin said， adding that if things cannot be done， it is because some involved in the system don’t want them to be done.