反腐不應政治掛帥 依法治國不枉不縱

<轉載自2017年11月27日 明報 社評>

中共中央宣傳部副部長魯煒上周「涉嫌嚴重違紀」接受調查，成為中共十九大之後「落馬」的首名正部級官員。由於他曾任中央網絡安全和信息化領導小組辦公室（中央網信辦）主任，是中國互聯網的「大總管」，此事在海內外引起了廣泛議論。從中紀委及官方傳媒發出的言論看，魯煒垮台雖然一定有涉及金錢的貪腐因素，但主要原因，還是政治上出了問題。

嚴控網絡並非個人行為 反腐肅貪突出政治問題

《中國紀檢監察報》對魯煒落馬的評論文章明確指出，「他的落馬讓人聯想到今年上半年中央巡視組對中央網信辦開展的『機動式』巡視」，又指「不要以為昨天犯的事今天就無人再問，不要以為自己能夠捂着蓋着相安無事，該領受的懲罰遲早會來」。這也就明示，魯煒落馬事關其任中央網信辦主任時的行為。

魯煒自2013年擔任內地互聯網大總管的3年期間，當局對互聯網管控日漸加強，不僅封鎖境外網站，嚴格審查過濾網絡內容，網上言論尺度也不斷收緊，打擊網絡大V等意見領袖的「清網行動」，更招來國際詬病，引發網民批評。不過，自從他去年6月卸任中央網信辦主任以後，內地互聯網管控並未有絲毫放鬆，反而變本加厲，可見魯煒時期的嚴刑峻法，並非其個人行為。

今年6月，中央巡視組就在巡視後指中央網信辦貫徹落實中共總書記習近平指示和工作要求「不夠堅決、不夠及時」、「政治責任感不強，落實中央網信工作重大決策部署不夠到位」、「政治擔當缺失」、「維護政治安全不夠有力」、「政治生態不良，存在『小圈子』問題」等。由此可見，「政治問題」才是魯煒今次落馬受查的主因。

去年以來，中共在查處涉及貪腐高官時，愈來愈多地突出「政治問題」，在查處全國政協前常務副秘書長孫懷山、天津市前代理書記黃興國、遼寧省委前書記王珉、北京市委前副書記呂錫文等人的通報中，都出現了「嚴重違反政治紀律和政治規矩」、「妄議中央」等字眼。十九大期間，中證監主席劉士余在發言中，更公開批前兩任重慶市委書記薄熙來和孫政才、中央政法委前書記周永康、全國政協前副主席令計劃、兩名中央軍委前副主席徐才厚和郭伯雄等人「陰謀篡黨奪權」，令人「觸目驚心」 。在中共十九大展覽中，上述高官的被查處也被形容為「消除重大政治隱患」。

回顧歷史，自中共建政頭40年的歷次運動中，受整肅高官都以政治罪名被罷黜。從高崗、劉少奇到林彪、「四人幫」，從華國鋒到胡耀邦、趙紫陽，無不如是。但自從八九六四後，中共對高官的整肅不再控以政治罪名，從北京市委前書記陳希同，到上海市委前書記陳良宇，以至後來的薄熙來、周永康、徐才厚、郭伯雄、令計劃等人，官方對外公布的罪名都是貪污受賄瀆職等刑事罪名，反映中共力圖淡化黨內鬥爭的政治色彩。

講政治勿干擾法律程序 陽光下才可獲長久支持

但自去年起，內地又開始強調對貪官的政治指控，如指控孫政才的「六宗罪」就包括「喪失政治立場，嚴重踐踏黨的政治紀律和政治規矩」、「講排場、搞特權」、「選人用人唯親唯利，泄露組織秘密」、「官僚主義嚴重，庸懶無為」等政治指控。

值得注意的是，一直被視為中共反腐利器的中央巡視組，近年也將巡視重點轉向「黨內政治生活」，去年以來，巡視組到一些省區市「回頭看」後，就指天津市「思想政治建設薄弱，少數黨員幹部理想信念喪失，不信馬列信鬼神」，遼寧省「一些領導幹部肆無忌憚拉幫結派，不同程度存在『小圈子』、搞『幫派』現象」，廣西則被指「落實中央重大決策部署不到位，扶貧脫困存在數據失真、項目不準」。

中央巡視組在對高校的巡視，也把重點放在「是不是在思想上政治上和行動上同以習近平為核心的黨中央保持高度一致？是不是把思想政治工作貫穿教育教學全過程？是不是認真落實民主生活會、民主評議黨員、談心談話等制度？」等方面。

從政治上打倒到反腐肅貪刑事化，反映的是「去政治化」的傾向，現在由反經濟腐敗向反政治腐敗傾斜，反映了中共仍然是一個「講政治」的政黨。不提政治罪名時不等於背後沒有政治，現在將政治因素擺上枱面應該更增加透明度。只不過，政治正確是中共的「家事」，在強調依法治國、依規治黨的今天，人們希望對貪官的懲處不應忽略法律程序，以事實為依據，以法律為準繩，勿枉勿縱，切忌因政治因素干擾法律的實施。反腐肅貪在陽光下進行，讓人民大眾感受到法律的威懾力的同時，也感受到法律的公平正義，如此，才能讓國人對反貪腐風暴保持信心，贏得長久的支持。

Politics should take back seat in campaign against corruption

LU WEI, the former deputy head of the propaganda department of the Communist Party of China (CPC), was under investigation last week for "his serious alleged irregularities". The matter has provoked widespread discussion at home and abroad given the fact that Lu was formerly the head of the General Office of the Central Leading Group for Internet Security and Informatization (GOCLGISI). Judging from what has been said by the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (CCDI) and official media outlets, the downfall of Lu must have to do with corruption, in which pecuniary advantages must have been involved, but it is primarily down to his political mistakes.

During Lu's three-year tenure as mainland China's Internet tsar, which began in 2013, the authorities' censorship of the internet was stepped up. Not only were websites from outside China blocked and posts on the net heavily censored, but freedom of speech on the internet was also being ceaselessly curtailed. The "cleaning-up of the internet", the campaign against key opinion leaders (the so-called "Big Vs"), was castigated by the international community and criticised by netizens. However, even though Lu stepped down from his GOCLGISI post in June last year, in no sense has internet censorship in mainland China been loosened since then, but it has instead gone even further and further. It can thus be seen that the draconian measures implemented during Lu's reign were not just his own policy.

In June this year, after a tour of inspection of the GOCLGISI, the Central Leading Group for Inspection Work commented that the General Office was "not resolute and prompt enough" when implementing the instructions and requirements of Xi Jinping, the General Secretary of the CPC, that "its sense of political responsibility was not strong enough, and it fell short of implementing the major decisions and plans of the central government regarding internet security and informatization", that "it lacks political commitment", that "it is not strong enough in maintaining political security", that "its political ecology is undesirable, and problems like 'small circles' persist". It is clear that "political mistakes" are the main reason why Lu has been removed from his post and is being investigated.

History shows that during the various movements that took place in the first forty years after the CPC came to power, high-ranking officials that were disciplined were invariably dismissed for political crimes. That was the case for Gao Geng, Liu Xiaoqi, Lin Biao, the "Gang of Four", Hua Guofeng, Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang. Since the June Fourth Incident in 1989, however, the CPC had not charged high-ranking officials with political crimes when they disciplined them. From Chen Xitong, the former party chief of Beijing and Chen Liangyu, the former party chief of Shanghai, to Bo Xilai, Zhou Yongkang, Xu Caihou, Go Boxiong, Ling Jihua who were targeted later, the charges brought to them as announced by the authorities were all criminal offences such as corruption, acceptance of bribes or failure to do one's duties, showing the CPC's attempt to play down the political overtones of the struggles within the party.

The transition from the political removal of officials to the criminalisation of corruption showed a tendency towards "depoliticisation". But the shift of focus from the campaign against financial corruption to the campaign against political corruption demonstrates the fact that the CPC remains a political party that prioritises politics. Back when political crimes were not mentioned, it was not necessary the case that politics did not play a part. Now that political factors have taken a front seat, more transparency is necessary. However, political correctness should only be an internal matter for the CPC. At a time when it is emphasised that the country should be run in accordance with the law and the CPC should be run in accordance with its regulations, people are hoping to see that the due process of law is not neglected when punishments are meted out to corrupt officials. The punishments should be based on facts and guided by the law. The guilty should not escape punishment, nor should the innocent get punished. The enforcement of the law should not be interfered by political factors. The campaign against corruption should be conducted in a transparent manner so as to keep the Chinese people confident about it and win their long-time support for it.

反腐不應政治掛帥 依法治國不枉不縱

中共中央宣傳部副部長魯煒上周「涉嫌嚴重違紀」接受調查。由於他曾任中央網絡安全和信息化領導小組辦公室（中央網信辦）主任，此事在海內外引起了廣泛議論。從中紀委及官方傳媒發出的言論看，魯煒垮台雖然一定有涉及金錢的貪腐因素，但主要原因，還是政治上出了問題。

魯煒自2013年擔任內地互聯網大總管的3年期間，當局對互聯網管控日漸加強，不僅封鎖境外網站，嚴格審查過濾網絡內容，網上言論尺度也不斷收緊，打擊網絡大V等意見領袖的「清網行動」，更招來國際詬病，引發網民批評。不過，自從他去年6月卸任中央網信辦主任以後，內地互聯網管控並未有絲毫放鬆，反而變本加厲，可見魯煒時期的嚴刑峻法，並非其個人行為。

今年6月，中央巡視組就在巡視後指中央網信辦貫徹落實中共總書記習近平指示和工作要求「不夠堅決、不夠及時」、「政治責任感不強，落實中央網信工作重大決策部署不夠到位」、「政治擔當缺失」、「維護政治安全不夠有力」、「政治生態不良，存在『小圈子』問題」等。由此可見，「政治問題」才是魯煒今次落馬受查的主因。

回顧歷史，自中共建政頭40年的歷次運動中，受整肅高官都以政治罪名被罷黜。從高崗、劉少奇到林彪、「四人幫」，從華國鋒到胡耀邦、趙紫陽，無不如是。但自從八九六四後，中共對高官的整肅不再控以政治罪名，從北京市委前書記陳希同，到上海市委前書記陳良宇，以至後來的薄熙來、周永康、徐才厚、郭伯雄、令計劃等人，官方對外公布的罪名都是貪污受賄瀆職等刑事罪名，反映中共力圖淡化黨內鬥爭的政治色彩。

從政治上打倒到反腐肅貪刑事化，反映的是「去政治化」的傾向，現在由反經濟腐敗向反政治腐敗傾斜，反映了中共仍然是一個「講政治」的政黨。不提政治罪名時不等於背後沒有政治，現在將政治因素擺上枱面應該更增加透明度。只不過，政治正確是中共的「家事」，在強調依法治國、依規治黨的今天，人們希望對貪官的懲處不應忽略法律程序，以事實為依據，以法律為準繩，勿枉勿縱，切忌因政治因素干擾法律的實施。反腐肅貪在陽光下進行，讓人民大眾感受到法律的威懾力的同時，也感受到法律的公平正義，如此，才能讓國人對反貪腐風暴保持信心，贏得長久的支持。