People's Congress deputies learning to say no

• Source: Global Times
• [21:09 March 14 2010]
• Comments

Lü Xiaobo

Editor's Note:

The 3rd Session of the 11th National People's Congress (NPC) closed Sunday. During the past decade, important changes have taken place in the NPC. Global Times (GT) reporter Chen Chenchen talked to Lü Xiaobo (Lü), professor of the School of Government, Nanjing University, on what these changes signify.

GT: More than 70 percent of NPC deputies are between 41 to 60 years old. Some say China is becoming a country led by middle-aged people, in contrast to the old leaders of the past. How do you view this change?

Lü: Abolishing the existing system of lifelong tenure was proposed in the Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of Our Party Since the Founding of the People's Republic of China, passed in June 1981. Since then, the age of political leaders at various levels has been restricted.

This is positive. Leaders worldwide are getting younger, but China still needs mechanisms to help young people stand out. Public opinion should also be more tolerant of young officials and NPC deputies.

However, looking at NPC deputies, we still find they are generally older than officials at the CPC and government organs.

GT: Is this related to officials entering the NPC after retirement?

Lü: Yes. That's the main reason why deputies in the NPC are older on average. This happens in people's congresses at different levels.

It's normal for officials to change posts, but this one-way flow has made some of those officials lose their enthusiasm for work, and treat the NPC as just another meeting.

This not only blocks the NPC's functioning, but goes against the normal relations between the NPC and the governments, courts and procuratorates.

What's advisable is that those NPC deputies who prove to be outstanding at discussing political affairs can take up posts in the CPC and government organizations. This will encourage hardworking NPC deputies.

Moreover, officials who've once served in the NPC may consciously accept supervision from the NPC and regard the NPC as the top State organ.

GT: Officials, entrepreneurs and celebrities are taking up more seats in the NPC. Some of them bring ridiculous proposals to the NPC session, which have been criticized by netizens. How to effectively solve this problem?

Lü: The tendency you just mentioned directly affects the NPC's capacity to deliberate on state affairs. It's unimaginable that a country's top political body can include people incompetent at deciding such things.

In traditional society, administration and the deliberation of politics mainly relied on experience. However, modern politics has become more and more complicated. Constantly emerging problems call for professional knowledge of both administrators and political participants.

In a country with a population of 1.3 billion, each NPC deputy represents the interests of 430,000 people, which means he or she bears significant responsibility.

An individual without political wisdom and the ability of discussing politics cannot represent the interests of so many voters. In order to solve this problem, we should improve the existing electoral law, and elect deputies of people's congresses at various levels in strict accordance with the electoral law.

GT: A draft amendment to the Electoral Law were delivered during this year's NPC, aiming at eliminating the discrepancy in the representation of rural and urban residents in the people's congresses. Do you believe the move will provide grass-roots deputies with more opportunities?

Lü: Rural deputies used to represent eight times the number of people represented by each urban deputy. Since 1995, the ratio has been 4:1. The new amendment will change the ratio to 1:1.

This means that urban and rural people are going to enjoy equal electoral rights. However, who will be elected as NPC deputies still depends on electoral results, rather than candidates' occupations or identities.

There's no lack of talented individuals among Chinese farmers. But generally speaking, their level of education and political skill is probably lower than that of other groups.

Currently, public attention focuses on equal representation. But actually, what's more interesting is the change in language from "candidates can meet with voters and answer questions" into "candidates should meet with voters and answer questions according to voters' requirements." "Can" indicates ruling by electoral committees, whereas "should" puts more weight on voters.

However, "according to voters' requirements" still appears ambiguous. How many voters need to let their requirements be known before they can meet with deputy candidates? Should they give oral or written requirements? The lack of clarity is a flaw of the system.