翻译摘要:河南省”特大矿难免市长”的潜在风险

“特大矿难免市长”的潜在风险

2011年5月10日 09:31

选稿:陆霖霖  来源:东方网  作者:赵勇锋

河南省政府近日对2008年制定的《关于进一步加强煤矿安全生产工作的若干意见》提出《补充意见》,加大对煤矿安全事故处罚力度,明确规定:如果发生一次死亡人数在50人以上特别重大事故,或者一年内发生两起一次死亡30至49人特别重大事故的,给予省辖市市长、分管副市长免职处理。(5月9日《大河报》)

特大矿难直接免职省辖市市长,这恐怕堪称史上最严厉的煤矿安全事故问责机制了。仅此一条就足以看出,河南省政府对煤矿工人生命安全的高度负责,对煤矿安全生产的高度重视,以及对治理近年来煤矿事故频发的强大决心。

作为“铁腕治乱”,“特大矿难免职市长”无疑有着明显的积极作用。在当前“一把手效应”仍是不争事实的前提下,加大对主要领导的问责力度,势必能调动一切积极因素,最大可能地保障煤矿生产安全。我们完全可以乐观地预测:只要该《补充意见》严格实施,河南在煤矿安全方面将给外界一个崭新的形象,河南煤矿工人将竖起幸福的大拇指对政府说:中。

不过,这项严厉的处罚措施带给河南煤矿美好前景的同时,也存在不容忽视的潜在风险。

首先,它有可能对“矿难瞒报”现象推波助澜。我们虽然有一套相对完善的矿难上报制度,但由于监督机制不够健全,就在事实上造成来自于“上面”的瞒报行为往往处于无人监管的局面。联系到“上有政策下有对策”的老生常谈,不能不令人担心,将来会不会经常看到“49”这个数字,那将是矿工无法言说的噩梦。

其次,它有可能面临“非人性化”的指责,并且偏离“以人为本”的轨道。一方面,并非一切矿难都是责任事故,又并非一切事故都和市长有关,如果不具体问题具体分析,而是一刀切地让市长“背黑锅”,恐怕会误伤那些兢兢业业但运气不佳的好干部。另一方面,生命既不应该用金钱量化,也不应该用“官位”量化,49条生命和50条生命在本质上是一样珍贵的,如果确系责任事故,哪怕只有1人死亡,也必须严厉追究市长的责任,这才是真正的尊重生命。

再次,它有可能偏离法治精神,不利于制度创新。之所以出现矿难事故频发,在很大程度上是因为我们在“制度管人”方面存在一些缺陷,而《补充意见》只是加强了“人管人”的力度,并没有涉及多少制度方面的修补和完善。从这个意义上说,尽管它效率很高,但同时也会使以“一把手效应”为代表的人治现象愈演愈烈。

总之,在现阶段条件下,河南通过问责市长保障煤矿生产安全的举措无疑是正确的,也是进步的,但同时也要认真反省其中的潜在风险,努力应对不断创新,逐步实现从“人管人”到“制度管人”的转变,这才是根本的制胜之道。

According to a newly revised Henan province regulation, a Henan Province mayor will automatically be fired if a mining disaster that kills 50 or more miners occurs in the mayor’s jurisdiction. Many articles on this story are at this URL:

http://tinyurl.com/henan-mine-mayor  

My rough summary of the commentary critical of this new regulation follows, the original Chinese text is above. 

The Dongfang Wang carries a commentary titled the “Hidden Risk of “Firing the Mayor When a Big Mining Disaster Occurs” that argues that this is too crude a tool, that this will cause falsifying of statistics such as under-reporting of mining disasters.   Miners will be pleased, and many leaders will pay much more attention to mine safety.  However

Some mayors might be unlucky when a disaster occurs that they could not possibly have prevented.  What China needs is not another iteration of people controlling people but the creation of a good system that can regulate human activities.  This is not the rule of law; it is just a tougher version of the rule of  man.

Demanding that local leaders take responsibility for safety is a good idea.  But it needs to be thought over more carefully especially the hidden risks of establishing such a system.  China needs to change from “people managing people” to a system managing people.

This entry was posted in Law 法律, Society 社会 and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s