您的位置: 首页 » 法律资料网 » 法律法规 »

关于印发《关于地方公安机关录用人民警察实行省级统一招考的意见》的通知

时间:2024-05-13 15:18:16 来源: 法律资料网 作者:法律资料网 阅读:8002
下载地址: 点击此处下载

关于印发《关于地方公安机关录用人民警察实行省级统一招考的意见》的通知

人事部 公安部


关于印发《关于地方公安机关录用人民警察实行省级统一招考的意见》的通知

人发[2000]58号


各省、自治区、直辖市人事(人事劳动)厅(局),公安厅(局):

为了贯彻落实《中共中央关于进一步加强政法干部队伍建设的决定》(中发[1999]6号)精神,切实做好公安机关人民警察录用工作,严把公安机关“入口”关,人事部、公安部联合制定了《关于地方公安机关录用人民警察实行省级统一招考的意见》,现印发给你们,请贯彻落实。

二000年五月二十五日

关于地方公安机关录用人民警察实行省级统一招考的意见

建设高素质的公安机关人民警察队伍是依法治国,实现国家长治久安的重要保证。《公安机关人民警察录用办法》(人发[1996]84号,以下简称《录用办法》)下发以来,地方各级人事部门和公安机关在当地党委、政府的领导下,认真贯彻落实,促进了地方公安机关人民警察录用工作的规范化、制度化,推动了地方公安队伍整体素质和战斗力的提高。不少省、自治区、直辖市还结合本地实际情况,实行了以省为单位的公安机关统一招考制度,克服了省以下实施操作的困难,提高了考录工作的效率,严把了公安机关进人关,保证了新录用人民警察的基本素质。为了贯彻落实《中共中央关于进一步加强政法干部队伍建设的决定》(中发[1999]6号,以下简称《决定》)精神,建设高素质的公安机关人民警察队伍,加强公安机关人民警察录用工作,现就地方公安机关录用人民警察实行省级统一招考工作提出如下意见:
一、 充分认识地方公安机关录用人民警察实行省级统一招考的重要意义
公安机关是人民民主专政的重要工具,是武装性质的国家治安行政力量和刑事司法力量。地方各级公安机关担负着维护社会治安秩序,保障国家安全稳定的重任。地方公安机关录用人民警察的工作直接关系到人民警察队伍的素质。实行省级统一招考,是贯彻落实《决定》精神,建设高素质人民警察队伍的一项重要举措,对于严把公安机关进人关,改善公安队伍结构,提高公安队伍素质和战斗力,确保《人民警察法》、《国家公务员暂行条例》、《国家公务员录用暂行规定》和《录用办法》等法律、法规、规章的贯彻落实具有十分重要的意义,有利于推进公务员制度的实施和完善,深化公安机关人事制度改革,加强廉政建设,扩大选人范围,有效地杜绝进人、用人上的不正之风。
地方各级政府人事部门和公安机关要认真学习《决定》,针对当前公安机关人民警察录用工作中存在的问题,从国家政权建设和维护社会政治稳定的战略高度出发,充分认识实行省级统一招考的重要性和必要性;从完善国家公务员制度,建设高素质、专业化的国家公务员队伍出发,增强使命感和紧迫感,在当地党委、政府的领导下,积极配合,加强领导,认真推行省级统一招考,确保新录用的人民警察具有良好的政治素质、文化业务素质和良好道德品质。
二、 坚持“凡进必考”原则,切实做好省级统一招考工作
公安机关录用担任主任科员以下非领导职务公务员,必须实行考试录用制度,严把“进口”关。今后,地方各级公安机关录用主任科员以下人民警察,要做到以省(自治区、直辖市)为单位组织统一招考,其他部门或省以下地区不再组织人民警察的录用考试。少数尚不具备条件的地方,要积极创造条件尽快实行省级统一招考。在实行省级统一招考中,制定有关政策规定,确定考试内容、教材,制定体能、心理素质测评、体检和考核等标准,指导、检查各地的考录工作等由人事部、公安部负责;公共科目考试由省级政府录用主管机关统一组织实施;专业科目考试、面试、体检、体能、心理素质测评和考核由省级公安部门按照录用主管机关的要求统一组织实施。
三、 健全考试录用标准,规范审核审批工作
省级统一招考工作,要在贯彻“公开、平等、竞争、择优”原则的基础上,坚持德才兼备的标准,采取考试与考核相结合、审核与审批相结合的方式进行。公安机关要严格按照《录用办法》的规定,编制、审核、复核录用计划,报市(地)级以上人民政府人事部门审定。各地要严格按照“公安机关录用人民警察,必须经省级公安厅(局)审核后,由地市以上人事部门审批”的规定,对考试、体检、体能和心理素质测评和考核合格者,经审核审批同意后,方可录用为人民警察。非公安警察院校毕业的新录用人员必须接受公安专业培训。凡按规定接受公安专业培训而不合格的人员,以及试用期满不合格的人员,均取消录用资格。省、自治区、直辖市公安厅、局要严格执行录用审核制度,严把审核关。
四、 坚持公开原则,加强监督检查,建立考录工作责任制
省级统一招考工作,要坚持政策规定、程序方法和考录结果“三公开”制度。通过报纸、电台、电视台等新闻媒体发布公告,将考录原则、录用计划、招考范围、对象、条件、考试科目、考试考核成绩、录用结果等公之于众,主动接受社会舆论和人民群众的监督。同时,要建立健全人民警察考录工作责任制,加强监督检查,严格要求,严肃纪律,严禁徇私舞弊。对违反规定录用的人员,录用主管机关应取消其录用资格,公安机关予以清退。对违反规定进人的单位,要暂停进人,情况严重的,要追究主管领导和有关人员的责任,并予以通报。
民族自治区政府人事、公安部门可根据本文件精神,结合本地实际情况,制定相应的办法。
省级统一招考工作政策性强,涉及面广,省级政府人事部门作为本行政辖区国家公务员录用的主管机关,要高度重视,加强领导,会同公安机关,严格执行有关政策规定,精心组织安排,严把审核审批关,切实做好这项工作。



Chapter VII
Special Rules for Anti-dumping Disputes

OUTLINE

Section One Recourse of Anti-dumping Disputes to the DSB
I Introduction
II Sufficiency of Panel Request under the AD Agreement
(i) Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Article 17.4 of the AD Agreement
(ii) Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Article 17.5(i) of the AD Agreement
(iii) A Summary Guiding
III General Legal Basis for Claims against Legislation as Such
IV Special Rules for Claims against Anti-dumping Legislation as Such
(i) Introduction
(ii)General Legal Basis under Art. 17 of the AD Agreement
(iii) Understanding of Art. 17.4 of the AD Agreement
(iv) Extensive Basis in Context
(v) A Summary
Section Two Ad hoc Standard of Review for Anti-dumping Disputes
I Introduction
II Special Standard of Review under the AD Agreement: in General
(i) Ad hoc Approaches to Domestic Determination: Art. 17.6
(ii) Relationship between Art. 11 of the DSU and Art. 17.6 of the AD Agreement
(iii) A Summary Guiding
III Scope of Review of Fact-findings: Art. 17.5(ii) of the AD Agreement
(i)Overview of the GATT Practice
(ii)Concerned Rulings in Reports Issued by WTO Panels
(iii)Tentative Remarks: Guidance from the Appellate Body





Section One
Recourse of Anti-dumping Disputes to the DSB

I Introduction
Compared to the legally fragmented previous GATT dispute settlement system, the new WTO dispute settlement system is an integrated system with much broader jurisdiction and less scope for “rule shopping” and “forum shopping”. However, according to Art. 1.2 of the DSU which states in part that, “[t]he rules and procedures of this Understanding shall apply subject to such special or additional rules and procedures on dispute settlement contained in the covered agreements as are identified in Appendix 2 to this Understanding”, many covered agreements under the WTO jurisdiction continue to include special dispute settlement rules and procedures. Such special rules and procedures are listed in Appendix 2 to the DSU. And in this chapter, we will focus on such special dispute settlement rules concerning anti-dumping disputes, i.e. Arts. 17.4 through 17.7 of the Anti-dumping Agreement (‘the AD Agreement’).
An analysis of the DSB practice suggests a separate contribution of this chapter to this book, merited by dispute settlement proceedings in the anti-dumping field. In this chapter, the author focuses on the two main issues repeatedly raised, as preliminary or procedural issues, during dispute settlement regarding anti-dumping. One is the issue of recourse of anti-dumping disputes to the DSB, which deals mainly with Arts. 17.4 and 17.5(i) of the AD Agreement; the other one is the issue of standard of review in anti-dumping areas, which runs most on Art. 17.6, including Art. 17.5(ii), of the AD Agreement. And in this section we will focus on the first one. In this respect, Arts. 17.4 and 17.5(i) of the AD Agreement states:

“17.4 If the Member that requested consultations considers that the consultations pursuant to paragraph 3 have failed to achieve a mutually agreed solution, and if final action has been taken by the administering authorities of the importing Member to levy definitive anti-dumping duties or to accept price undertakings, it may refer the matter to the Dispute Settlement Body (“DSB”). When a provisional measure has a significant impact and the Member that requested consultations considers that the measure was taken contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 7, that Member may also refer such matter to the DSB.
17.5 The DSB shall, at the request of complaining party, establish a panel to examine the matter based upon:
(i) a written statement of the Member making the request indicating how a benefit accruing to it, directly or indirectly, under this Agreement has been nullified or impaired, or that the achieving of the objectives of the Agreement is being impeded, and
(ii) …”
II Sufficiency of Panel Request under the AD Agreement
Generally, as noted in previously, it is only where the provisions of the DSU and the special or additional rules and procedures of a covered agreement cannot be read as complementing each other that the special or additional provisions are to prevail. A special or additional provision should only be found to prevail over a provision of the DSU in a situation where adherence to the one provision will lead to a violation of the other provision, that is, in the case of a conflict between them. Then the author means to get down to the issue of whether these provisions cited above limits panel request under the AD Agreement to somehow other than those required by Art. 6.2 of the DSU.
In Mexico-HFCS (DS132), the dispute involves the imposition of a definitive anti-dumping measure by the Mexican Ministry of Trade and Industrial Development (SECOFI) on imports of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) from the United States. Mexico argues that the United States' request for establishment of this Panel is not consistent with the requirements of Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Art. 17.4 and 17.5(i) of the AD Agreement, and therefore argues that the Panel must terminate the proceeding without reaching the substance of the United States' claims.
(i) Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Art. 17.4 of the AD Agreement
In considering the alleged failure to assert claims under Art. 6.2 of the DSU and Art. 17.4 of the AD Agreement, the Panel rules that: 1
“[W]e note first that the Appellate Body has stated that Article 6.2 of the DSU and Article 17.4 of the AD Agreement are complementary and should be applied together in disputes under the AD Agreement. It has further stated that: ‘the word “matter” has the same meaning in Article 17 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement as it has in Article 7 of the DSU. It consists of two element: The specific “measure” and the “claims” relating to it, both of which must be properly identified in a panel request as required by Article 6.2 of the DSU.’

关于加强证券投资基金信息网上披露有关工作的通知

上海证券交易所


关于加强证券投资基金信息网上披露有关工作的通知


各基金管理有限公司:

为加强证券投资基金信息网上披露工作,便于投资者及时、完整地获取证券投资基金相关信息,根据中国证监会的有关要求,现就证券投资基金信息网上披露事宜通知如下:

一、自本通知发布之日起,各基金管理有限公司在与本所联系刊登或报备下列文件时,应同时向本所上市部提交相应的电子文件(包括word文件和据此转换成的pdf文件,下同):

1、基金发行公告

2、招募说明书

3、上市公告书

4、基金契约

5、基金托管协议

6、扩募说明书和扩募办法公告

7、中期报告

8、年度报告

9、基金投资组合公告

10、基金份额变动公告及其他临时公告

二、基金管理有限公司在报送电子文件时,可以采用录入磁盘并专人送达的方式,也可直接邮至本所上市部专用信箱:list@sse.com.cn。

三、各基金管理有限公司应将本通知发布之前已经披露的上述全部文件的电子文本录入磁盘,于2001年中期报告披露之前交至本所上市部。

四、若基金管理有限公司召开持有人大会修改基金契约,基金管理有限公司应在基金持有人大会通过契约修订案五个工作日内,将修订后的基金契约在本所网站披露。

五、在本所网站披露电子文件时,基金管理有限公司应向本所提交确认函,相关电子文件内容与书面文件内容应完全一致,并承担内容差错的责任。

六、本所负责将各基金管理有限公司提供的上述电子文件在本所网站(网址为http://www.sse.com.cn)上披露。本所建议各基金管理有限公司同时在自己的网站上披露所有已在本所网站披露的内容。

七、本通知自发布之日起实施。

附件:上网披露电子文件格式制作要求

上海证券交易所

2001年7月27日

附件

上网披露电子文件格式制作要求

一、电子文件使用Word编辑文档,编辑格式如下:

1、Word中文文档以中文简体字体存储;

2、页面的纸张大小设为“A4”,方向设为“纵向”;

3、报告正文字体设为“宋体”,字号设为“小四号”,表格内容字体不小于“小五号”字体;

4、正文行间距设为单倍行距。

二、对已经编辑好的word文件利用Adobe公司专用软件转换成pdf格式的文件。pdf文件中不能放置图像文件,文件大小不能超过1兆。

三、Word文件和据此转换成的pdf文件一并在公告刊登前交本所。

四、本所将按有关程序把公司制作的pdf文件直接上网,对文件内容概不负责。

五、文件类型必须在文件名中体现出来,文件名中必须包含基金代码、文件类型。

六、文件制作咨询电话:021-68804743、68815375。