Yang Deshan and Li Shaojie: Regulations as Safeguard for the Disciplinary Construction of the Communist Party of China: Historical Process, Content System, and Basic Experience

Relying on strict discipline to govern the Party is a fine tradition and political advantage of Marxist parties. Assessing the situation from the height of advancing the Party’s Great Self-Revolution ^[1], the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has integrated disciplinary development into the general requirements for Party building in the New Era, providing powerful support for comprehensively and strictly governing the Party through rigorous discipline and rules. In the report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC, Xi Jinping emphasized the need to "persist in strengthening the improvement of conduct and the enforcement of discipline through a rigorous tone," pointing the way forward for the entire Party to continue deepening disciplinary development.

Current academic research on this issue focuses on several areas: first, tracing historical evolution to summarize enlightened experiences from the history of the Party’s disciplinary development; second, exploring theoretical origins to find a theoretical basis in the discourses of classical Marxist writers and primary leaders of the CPC; third, focusing on practical value by examining the functional positioning of disciplinary development based on the contemporary requirements of comprehensively and strictly governing the Party; and fourth, discussing directions for development by proposing optimization strategies to address prominent issues in strict disciplinary enforcement. Existing research provides useful reflection for deepening the theory and practice of the Party’s disciplinary development; however, research analyzing disciplinary development from the perspective of constructing the system of intra-Party regulations remains insufficient.

The intra-Party regulations of the CPC are the solid guarantee for the Party’s disciplinary development. Historically, intra-Party regulations have moved in tandem with the Party's disciplinary work over the past century. To adapt to the needs of disciplinary enforcement in various historical periods, the Party formulated a series of institutional norms—intra-Party regulations in the strict sense—assisting the Party’s disciplinary development in achieving historic accomplishments. From a practical standpoint, the disciplinary regulations and systems formed through long-term accumulation constitute an important part of the CPC’s system of intra-Party regulations. They play a key role in the New Era for disciplinary development and for pushing the comprehensive and strict governance of the Party toward greater depth. "The regulatory guarantee for the CPC’s disciplinary development" encompasses both a dynamic historical process and the static institutional outcomes that ensure work is carried out in an orderly fashion. Systematically tracing the historical process and content system of the CPC’s use of intra-Party regulations to safeguard disciplinary development, and theoretically summarizing practical experience, will not only help guide research on disciplinary development toward greater depth but also contribute rational reflections to the advancement of governing the Party in accordance with regulations and the construction of the system of institutional norms for the Party’s self-revolution in the New Era.

I. The Historical Evolution of the Regulatory System for the CPC’s Disciplinary Development

Intra-Party regulations have provided a solid guarantee for the orderly conduct of the Party's disciplinary development over the past century and have consolidated the experiences and achievements of theoretical and practical work in institutional form. The evolution of the regulatory system provides important observational clues for retracing the course of the Party’s disciplinary development.

(1) The Period of the New Democratic Revolution: Emergence and Institutional Establishment

Since its founding, the CPC has attached great importance to forging a powerful fighting organization through strict discipline. The program adopted by the First National Congress of the Party put forward preliminary requirements for Party members to keep Party secrets, accept organizational supervision, and limit the holding of public office. The Party Constitution adopted by the Second National Congress dedicated a specific chapter to discipline, using substantial space to stipulate requirements for the minority to submit to the majority, subordinates to submit to superiors, and Party members to submit to the Central Committee, clearly defining six circumstances under which a member must be expelled for violating discipline. In August 1926, the CPC Central Committee issued the "Circular on Resolutely Cleaning Out Corrupt Elements," which was the first specialized regulation concerning integrity discipline. The Party Constitution revised by the Fifth National Congress clarified and detailed the methods of punishment for Party organizations and individual members for the first time, and for the first time stipulated the method of creation and the powers of the Commission for Discipline Inspection, beginning the exploration of the Party’s disciplinary inspection system.

The emphasis on "Party rules and Party laws" (党规党法) ^[2] at the Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee accelerated the integration of discipline and regulations. The meeting adopted the Decision on Working Rules and Discipline for the Central Committee and the Decision on Working Rules and Discipline for Party Branches at All Levels, naming specialized regulations after "discipline" for the first time and delineating working standards for Party organizations at all levels. In October 1942, the CPC Central Committee issued the Regulations on the Implementation of Probationary Measures for Party Members, establishing specialized regulations for specific disciplinary procedures for the first time. The Party Constitution adopted by the Seventh National Congress comprehensively summarized the experiences and lessons of disciplinary development during the revolutionary period, noting that the Party is a "unified fighting organization linked by conscious discipline that all members must fulfill," thereby according discipline a position of paramount importance. It integrated the defense of the Party and the protection of discipline into the obligations of members and the tasks of Party organizations. It stipulated disciplinary content in the form of a "negative list," stating that "no behavior departing from the Party’s program or Constitution is permitted within the Party, nor is any behavior permitted that sabotages Party discipline, asserts independence from the Party, engages in small-group activities, or involves feigning compliance while acting in opposition ^[3]." It restored and perfected the Fifth National Congress's provisions regarding the Commission for Discipline Inspection. While detailing the authority and methods of punishment, it also stipulated the rights of the punished to defense and appeal, as well as the principle of "learning from past mistakes to avoid future ones, and curing the sickness to save the patient" ^[4].

The period of the New Democratic Revolution was the initial construction phase of the regulatory system for disciplinary development. Conceptually, "discipline" and "regulations" were not yet fully distinguished during this period; many discourses and documents often used the two interchangeably. In terms of the quality of formulation, the development of regulations was still low, with more principled expressions than procedural stipulations and a lack of specificity. Substantively, the independence of regulations was weak; relevant provisions were often scattered as clauses within regulations related to organizational development, appearing fragmented and reactive, which to some extent affected the seriousness and operability of the regulations.

(2) The Period of Socialist Revolution and Construction: Specialization and Detail

After the founding of the People's Republic of China, strict discipline continued to serve as an important means of maintaining Party unity and ensuring the implementation of the political line. At the same time, it became a powerful tool for the Party to overcome bureaucratism and prevent Party members and cadres from becoming corrupt and degenerate under the new conditions of exercising nationwide power. The Decision on the Establishment of Central and Local Party Discipline Inspection Commissions issued in November 1949 stipulated the method of creation and the powers of commissions at all levels, laying the basic framework for the Party's disciplinary inspection system. In February 1950, the CPC Central Committee issued supporting regulations such as the Detailed Rules for the Work of the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection and the Directive on the Subordination of Party Discipline Inspection Commissions at All Levels to the Leadership of Party Committees at the Same Level. These detailed the requirements of the initial Decision regarding internal structures, disciplinary procedures, disciplinary education, and daily work, clarifying the "guidance" relationship between higher and lower commissions and the "leadership" relationship of the Party committee over the commission at the same level.

In March 1955, the National Conference of the CPC, summarizing the experiences and problems of disciplinary inspection work since the founding of the PRC, adopted the Resolution on the Establishment of Central and Local Control Commissions of the Party. It decided to establish Control Commissions ^[5] at all levels, further expanding their powers on the basis of inheriting and replacing the systems of the former discipline commissions. Their scope expanded from merely handling disciplinary cases to "checking and handling cases of Party members violating the Party Constitution, Party discipline, and state laws and decrees." The Eighth National Congress wrote these achievements into the new Party Constitution, consolidating the theoretical and practical experience of the Party’s disciplinary development since the founding of the PRC. In September 1962, the Tenth Plenary Session of the Eighth Central Committee adopted the Decision on Strengthening the Party's Control Organs. This decision and the supporting regulations issued subsequently aimed to increase the number of members on control commissions at all levels, add internal administrative bodies, establish a system for stationing oversight units in state organs, and create working codes for the disciplinary inspection workforce, driving another refinement of the disciplinary inspection system.

During the period of socialist revolution and construction, the Party’s disciplinary development gradually decoupled from the category of organizational development. Discipline inspection (control) commissions at all levels became specialized organs for maintaining Party discipline, leading to a refinement in the division of labor in Party building. Simultaneously, specialized regulations for disciplinary development emerged in large numbers, no longer subordinate to regulations for the Party’s organizational work. At several historical junctures, the Party adopted the format of "normative documents + supporting regulations" to stipulate leadership systems, working procedures, punishment authority, and standards for weighing discipline. These were both continuous and innovative, steadily advancing the process of regularizing the Party's disciplinary development.

(3) The New Period of Reform, Opening Up, and Socialist Modernization: Inheritance and Development

The Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee opened the New Period of Reform, Opening Up, and Socialist Modernization. Based on Deng Xiaoping's suggestions, the Plenary Session put forward the important task of "perfecting Party rules and laws and strictly enforcing Party discipline" for the new period. The Party Constitution formulated by the 12th National Congress stipulated for the first time the principle that "everyone is equal before Party discipline"; it incorporated "strictly observing Party discipline" into the admission oath; and it defined disciplinary inspection as work that Party organizations at all levels must frequently discuss and check, stating for the first time that Party organizations must be held accountable for dereliction of duty in maintaining Party discipline. It dedicated a specific chapter to "Party Discipline," emphasizing that besides the five types of disciplinary sanctions, "it is strictly prohibited to treat Party members with means that violate the Party Constitution or state laws," and allowing members to defend themselves and appeal. It also dedicated a chapter to "The Party’s Organs for Discipline Inspection," stipulating their main duties and the dual leadership system ^[6]. This Constitution built a solid framework for the Party’s disciplinary inspection work in the new period; the regulatory system for the Party’s disciplinary development took this as its foundation, and the quality of formulation improved significantly.

First, to specifically implement the principled requirements of the Party Constitution, a large number of supporting regulations to standardize disciplinary development procedures were issued, and they began to show categorical characteristics. For example, the Provisional Regulations on Improving the Party's Discipline Inspection System and Strengthening the Discipline Inspection Workforce aimed to standardize the building of the workforce; the Several Provisions on Strengthening Intra-Party Disciplinary Supervision of Party Member Cadres (Trial) aimed to detail oversight work; and the Regulations on Case Trial Work of the CPC Discipline Inspection Organs and Regulations on Case Inspection Work of the CPC Discipline Inspection Organs aimed to improve the quality of disciplinary review. These measures ensured that all aspects of the Party's disciplinary development had regulations to follow.

Second, intra-Party regulations established a clear system of disciplinary content. In response to urgent practical problems at the beginning of the new period, the Party first issued a set of individual regulations to curb various disciplinary violations, initially exploring types of discipline such as political discipline, propaganda discipline, foreign-affairs discipline, and integrity discipline. On this basis, the CPC Central Committee issued the Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Disciplinary Actions (Trial) in February 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the Disciplinary Action Regulations), integrating the individual regulations since reform and opening up into a system of Party discipline covering politics, organization and personnel, and dereliction of duty. As "the first regulation in the history of the CPC to comprehensively and systematically stipulate the qualitative and quantitative standards for intra-Party disciplinary violations," the Disciplinary Action Regulations signified that the Party’s disciplinary development had moved beyond a reactive approach to rule-making and onto a path of systematic integration. In subsequent revisions, it remained based on this basic framework while constantly covering new types of disciplinary violations, achieving a balance between regulatory stability and adaptability.

Third, with the establishment of the socialist market economy system, the phenomenon of corruption posed a serious challenge to socialist modernization, requiring the Party to take integrity discipline as a focus of regulatory protection. In addition to the aforementioned disciplinary regulations, the Central Committee successively promulgated the Decision on Several Tasks to be Handled Well in the Near Term in the Anti-Corruption Struggle, the Several Rules on the Integrity of Leading Cadres of the CPC in Performing Their Duties (Trial), and the Provisions on Implementing the Responsibility System for Improving Party Conduct and Upholding Integrity. These allowed anti-corruption work to achieve a higher degree of regularization and gradually be incorporated into the general layout of Party building as an independent sector of work.

(4) The New Era of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics: Maturity and Standardization

Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the regulatory system for the Party’s disciplinary development has reached new heights in terms of the quantity of formulations and the intensity of enforcement. The Party Constitutions from the 18th to the 20th National Congresses all perfected the Party's disciplinary provisions. The Party Central Committee twice revised the Disciplinary Action Regulations in 2015 and 2018. In 2021, it issued the Regulations on the Work of the Discipline Inspection Commission of the Communist Party of China (hereinafter referred to as the Discipline Inspection Commission Work Regulations), establishing a comprehensive regulation in the field of disciplinary inspection work. The Party Central Committee profoundly summarized the exploratory experience of disciplinary development over the past century, especially since the start of the New Era, forming a general understanding of strengthening the Party’s disciplinary development through intra-Party regulations. Its main contents include the following points:

First, the regulatory system for the Party’s disciplinary development must persist in the correct political direction and closely revolve around the general situation of the Party and the country’s work. It must provide political guarantees for maintaining the centralized and unified leadership of the Party Central Committee, ensuring the Party's long-term governance and the country's long-term peace and stability, and advancing the great new project of Party building in the New Era. Specifically: (1) All disciplinary provisions must "take the resolute maintenance of General Secretary Xi Jinping’s core position in the Party Central Committee and the Party as a whole, and the resolute maintenance of the Party Central Committee’s authority and centralized, unified leadership as the starting point and end point," clearly manifesting the "Two Upholds." (2) The regulatory system for disciplinary development must "take the Party Constitution as the fundamental compliance," detailing the Party Constitution's requirements for disciplinary principles, systems, and content, and ensuring the serious conduct of disciplinary development through the authority of the Party Constitution and the rigor of the system. (3) The regulatory system for disciplinary development must highlight the requirement that "Party rules and Party discipline are stricter than state laws," demonstrating the political advantages of the CPC's advanced nature and purity through high disciplinary requirements.

Second, the regulations and systems for the Party's discipline building must emphasize scientific standardization. The construction of regulations must achieve the following: First, precise phrasing. In the formulation of regulations, a balance must be struck between "Party parlance" and "legal parlance," "refining relevant provisions, clarifying standards for disciplinary action, and unifying the nomenclature of disciplinary violations," thereby improving the level of standardization in practice. Second, streamlining and pragmatism. A systems-thinking approach must be maintained to distill common problems from the complex instances of disciplinary violations within the Party and form a negative list; regulations "must be neither overly broad and all-encompassing nor overly fragmented and trivial, and must avoid both the 'oxpen for a cat' ^[7] approach and excessive complexity." Third, integration and support. From supervision to discipline and then to accountability, the entire process of discipline building must form a chain of systems, "ensuring that substantive and procedural regulations, comprehensive and specialized provisions, and lower-level and higher-level regulations coordinate and complement each other," protecting the Party’s discipline building through the aggregate effect of the regulatory system.

Third, we must focus intently on ensuring the implementation and effectiveness of the regulations and systems for the Party's discipline building. Both the formulation and execution are organic components of institutional building. The effectiveness of execution directly relates to the seriousness and authority of the regulations already issued. Having achieved a state where "there are rules to follow," we must resolutely correct phenomena such as feudal compliance ^[8], "tight on the outside but loose on the inside," and selective enforcement. By improving the responsibility system for the execution of intra-Party regulations and persisting in the integrated advancement of formulation and implementation, we can effectively transform the institutional advantages of existing discipline building regulations into governance efficacy and prevent the "broken windows effect."

II. The Regulatory and Institutional System of Discipline Building in the New Era

As of July 1, 2021, the CPC Central Committee, the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (CCDI), and the working departments of the Central Committee have formulated a total of 374 intra-Party regulations. Among the currently effective and publicly accessible central and ministerial-level intra-Party regulations, those specifically created for or closely related to the Party's discipline building include 1 Party Constitution, 3 Sets of Guiding Principles (准则), 9 Regulations (条例), 24 Provisions (规定), 3 Rules (规则), 10 Measures (办法), and 2 Implementing Rules (细则), accounting for 14% of the total. The content of these regulations can be divided into five dimensions: guiding principles, institutional frameworks, substantive provisions, procedural provisions, and supervisory provisions.

(1) Guiding Principles

The Party’s discipline building shares common goals with its political, ideological, and organizational building, yet it also requires the establishment of basic principles that highlight its own characteristics. "Basic principles refer to the legal principles that embody the fundamental values of the law; they are the guiding ideology and starting point of all legal activities, constituting the neural center of the legal system." The basic principles established by the Party Constitution for discipline building include the principle that all are equal before Party discipline in the General Program, as well as the principle of "learning from past mistakes to avoid future ones and curing the sickness to save the patient" ^[9], the principle of strictly enforcing discipline, the principle of "catching problems early and small" and "nipping them in the bud," the principle of precise disciplinary enforcement, and the principle of protecting members' rights in the main text. Confirmed by the fundamental law of the Party, these contents have been elevated into the unified will of the entire Party, becoming fundamental norms of conduct that the whole Party must follow, and demonstrating the CPC's high regard for major issues in discipline building.

The basic principles stipulated in the Party Constitution need to be refined by lower-level regulations. Article 4 of the Regulations on CPC Disciplinary Action specifically explains the principle of equality before Party discipline—namely, the serious and impartial enforcement of discipline, with no Party organization or member allowed to exist outside the constraints of discipline. It explains the principle of "learning from past mistakes to avoid future ones and curing the sickness to save the patient," requiring a combination of punishment and education for violating organizations and members. It explains the principle of "catching problems early and small and nipping them in the bud," which means strengthening the education, management, and supervision of the whole Party and "putting discipline in the front." It adds the principle of seeking truth from facts—taking facts as the basis, accurately determining the nature of the violation, and handling it appropriately according to the circumstances. It adds the principle of democratic centralism, requiring that disciplinary actions be decided through collective discussion by the Party organization according to procedure and that lower-level organizations must execute the decisions of higher-level organizations. Article 7 of the Regulations on the Work of Commissions for Discipline Inspection adds the principle that "discipline is stricter than the law." Articles 3 and 54 of the Rules of the CPC for Supervision and Discipline Enforcement by Disciplinary Inspection Organs add the principle of "balancing leniency and severity," emphasizing leniency for those who confess and severity for those who resist, as well as the principle of internal control, which requires strengthening the internal supervision of disciplinary inspection organs through the separation of investigation and adjudication to improve the quality of case handling. The Regulations on Case Investigation Work of the CPC Disciplinary Inspection Organs and its implementing rules also stipulate the principle of independent disciplinary enforcement, prohibiting any state organ, social organization, or individual from interfering with or obstructing the case-handling activities of disciplinary inspection organs.

These basic principles encapsulate the experiences and lessons of the Party during its century-long process of discipline building, constitute the fundamental theory for understanding Party discipline, and serve as the starting point and guiding ideology for other specific provisions, holding great significance for the conduct of practical work.

(2) Institutional Frameworks

A "system" is a complex structure that includes both the actors and the institutional arrangements that define the relationships between them. The conduct of the Party's discipline building depends on a structural framework with a clear division of labor and rigorous organization. Regarding the obligations and duties of actors, the Party Constitution stipulates the obligation of members to "consciously abide by Party discipline," assigns Party organizations at all levels the duty to "strictly execute and maintain Party discipline," and positions the Commissions for Discipline Inspection (CDIs) at all levels as "specialized organs for intra-Party supervision" responsible for supervision, discipline enforcement, and accountability, as well as educating members on disciplinary compliance. The 19th Party Congress proposed "granting Party groups ^[10] with personnel management authority the corresponding power to take disciplinary actions." Following this, the CPC Central Committee issued the Provisions on the Procedures for Party Groups to Discuss and Decide on Disciplinary Actions for Members (Trial), refining the content of disciplinary actions taken by Party groups against the members and cadres under their jurisdiction. The Rules on the Work of Dispatched Agencies of Disciplinary Inspection and Supervision Organs stipulate that the disciplinary inspection and supervision groups dispatched by CDIs and supervision commissions to Party and state organs at the same level possess duties of supervision, discipline enforcement, accountability, and investigation.

The core of clarifying the relationship between disciplinary subjects is the division of disciplinary authority. The relationship between various subjects within the Party can be summarized as "Party committee holds primary responsibility, CDI holds specialized responsibility; dual leadership, and hierarchical responsibility." "Party committee holds primary responsibility, CDI holds specialized responsibility" refers to the horizontal division of authority between the Party committee and the CDI at the same level. Articles 4, 6, and 7 of the Provisions on the Primary Responsibility of Party Committees (Party Groups) for Implementing Comprehensively and Strictly Governing the Party clarify that Party committees (Party groups) at all levels bear the primary responsibility for comprehensively and strictly governing the Party, leading, supporting, and supervising the disciplinary organs at the same level in fulfilling their duties. Article 9 clarifies that CDIs at all levels are the specialized organs for intra-Party supervision and discipline, playing an auxiliary role in the Party committee’s (Party group’s) implementation of primary responsibility. "Dual leadership, and hierarchical responsibility" refers to the vertical division of authority from the central to the grassroots levels. Article 45 of the Party Constitution stipulates that local CDIs at all levels work under the dual leadership of the Party committee at the same level and the CDI at the higher level, and that the higher-level CDI must strengthen its leadership over the lower-level CDI. The Regulations on the Work of Commissions for Discipline Inspection and the Regulations of the CPC on Intra-Party Supervision further refine the higher-level CDI’s powers regarding work deployment, supervision and guidance, inspection of work, hearing reports and debriefings, and personnel nomination over the lower-level CDI. These regulations explicitly require the higher level to conduct political and professional training for lower-level CDIs, stipulate that the investigation of corruption cases is primarily led by the higher-level CDI, and allow the higher level to change erroneous or inappropriate decisions made by lower-level CDIs according to procedure. When necessary, the higher level may directly investigate or organize and command the investigation of major or complex cases within the jurisdiction of lower-level CDIs, effectively strengthening the supervisory capacity of local CDIs. Articles 7 and 9 of the Rules of the CPC for Supervision and Discipline Enforcement by Disciplinary Inspection Organs clearly stipulate a system of hierarchical responsibility for supervision and discipline enforcement, and a system of hierarchical handling for case investigations, granting disciplinary authority over corresponding levels of cadres to CDIs of different levels.

The stipulation of the Party’s discipline building system in intra-Party regulations helps ensure coordination between various disciplinary subjects and lays a critical foundation for the conduct of supervision, discipline enforcement, and accountability.

(3) Substantive Provisions

Consciously abiding by discipline is the obligation of every Party member. Substantive provisions refine the specific content of this obligation through a structure of "applicable assumption + behavioral model + regulatory consequence." Since the 18th Party Congress, the Central Committee has twice revised the Regulations on CPC Disciplinary Action. In the spirit of separating discipline from law and ensuring discipline is stricter than the law, it removed content that overlapped with national laws, forming a system of "Six Disciplines."

Political discipline consists of rules that Party organizations and members must follow regarding their political direction, stance, speech, and behavior; its core requirement is to ensure the unity of the whole Party on the basis of its political line. Organizational discipline consolidates the Party's organizational system and strengthens its organizational capacity by standardizing management procedures between organizations and between the organization and individuals. Integrity discipline consists of the norms of conduct established by the Party to ensure that members exercise power with integrity during official activities, aimed at blocking the space for rent-seeking. Mass discipline consists of the requirements that Party organizations and members must follow when implementing the Party's mass line and handling Party-mass relations, aimed at maintaining the "flesh-and-blood ties" between the Party and the masses. Work discipline clarifies procedural rules for Party organizations and members in various specific tasks, aimed at ensuring the normal development of the various undertakings led by the Party. Life discipline places higher moral demands on members than national law, serving as an important carrier for demonstrating the advanced nature of Party members.

Within the discourse of the Party's discipline building, the Party has also extended specialized disciplines from the foundation of the Six Disciplines, such as election discipline, confidentiality discipline, financial and economic discipline, and investigation discipline. These are also norms of conduct that relevant Party organizations and members must follow. The Central Committee has also issued many standalone regulations to refine specific disciplinary rules, such as the Regulations on Requesting Instructions and Reporting Major Matters and the Provisions on the Reporting of Personal Matters by Leading Cadres, which address the issue of requesting instructions and reporting within political discipline.

(4) Procedural Provisions

To strengthen the standardization of supervision and discipline enforcement, we must "improve the regulatory system, standardize work flows, and firmly establish an awareness of the rule of law, procedures, and evidence, exercising the power of disciplinary inspection in accordance with regulations, discipline, and the law." Procedural provisions are institutional arrangements designed by the Party to ensure the effectiveness of substantive discipline throughout the entire process of discipline building. These procedures are specifically refined into ten stages by regulations such as the Rules of the CPC for Supervision and Discipline Enforcement by Disciplinary Inspection Organs.

First, the discipline education stage: through regular education on the Party Constitution and regulations, guiding members and cadres to cultivate their character and exercise self-discipline, building a strong ideological and moral line of defense. Second, the supervision stage: taking compliance with Party discipline as the primary content of intra-Party supervision, and encouraging any organization or individual to report or accuse disciplinary violations, while strictly prohibiting the suppression or retaliation against whistleblowers. Third, the clue disposal stage: requiring disciplinary inspection organs to collect problem clues transferred from various supervisory bodies and handle them according to four methods: talk and inquiry, preliminary verification, temporary storage for further investigation, or closing the case. Fourth, the talk and inquiry ^[11] stage: requiring Party committees (Party groups) and disciplinary inspection organs to promptly conduct reminder talks or inquiry letters regarding problem clues, urging members and cadres to enhance their Party concepts and disciplinary awareness, and handling the matter according to the true nature of the issues reflected. Fifth, the preliminary verification stage: requiring Party committees (Party groups) and CDIs to collect evidence along suspected disciplinary violation leads that are verifiable and providing suggestions for further disposal. Sixth, the case filing and investigation stage: on the premise of having already grasped some facts and evidence of violations, filing a case to investigate the suspected members and cadres, clarifying the violation issues, and forming an investigation report. Seventh, the adjudication stage: reviewing and checking cases that require Party disciplinary action and providing a final opinion. Eighth, the disciplinary action stage: the CDI responsible for the investigation communicates the disciplinary opinion to the Party branch where the person under investigation is located; the general membership meeting discusses and forms a resolution, which is reported for approval to the grassroots Party committee or the Party organization with the authority to issue the penalty. Ninth, the appeal and remedy stage: allowing members to request a review of their punishment, providing an opportunity to correct potential defamation, framing, or wrongful judgments, thereby protecting the legitimate rights of members. Tenth, the rectification and warning stage: this includes both follow-up education and assistance for the disciplined individual, as well as using typical cases to conduct warning education—"using cases to clarify discipline and promote rectification"—to combine the punishment of the very few with the education of the great majority, achieving a unification of political, disciplinary/legal, and social effects.

The procedural arrangements for the Party's discipline building follow the logical sequence of "education—supervision—discipline—re-education," with prevention as the primary goal, supervision forming a deterrent, punishment for violations, and the ultimate aim of enhancing disciplinary self-awareness. Discipline education, as both the starting point and endpoint of the entire process, is an important manifestation of the CPC's persistence in "ideological Party building." Securing the entire process through regulations and systems demonstrates the close integration of ideological Party building and institutional Party governance.

(5) Supervisory Provisions

A complete institutional system should operate orderly by its own internal momentum and function smoothly according to predetermined procedures, without being interrupted or interfered with due to changes in people, matters, time, or location. The momentum for "self-operation" comes not only from a rule-of-law mindset and approach but more importantly from "scientific procedural design and powerful supervision and inspection." Therefore, supervisory provisions must be established within the institutional security system of discipline building. Unlike the supervision over disciplinary violations mentioned in the procedural provisions above, the supervisory provisions here primarily target the execution of the aforementioned regulations and systems.

First, the Party committees (Party leadership groups), commissions for discipline inspection, and leading Party cadres respectively bear the primary responsibility, supervisory responsibility, and leadership responsibility for comprehensively and strictly governing the Party. The Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Accountability stipulate that if Party organizations or leading Party cadres are lax in the strengthening of Party discipline, leading to frequent violations of regulations and discipline and causing a malignant impact, they shall be held accountable. Second, disciplinary inspection organs must establish and improve internal working mechanisms to ensure coordination and mutual restraint among supervision and inspection, review and investigation, case supervision and management, and case adjudication. In accordance with the Regulations on the Work of Commissions for Discipline Inspection, the Regulations of the CPC on Case Inspection Work of Disciplinary Inspection Organs, and the Rules on Supervision and Discipline Enforcement Work for Disciplinary Inspection Organs of the CPC, they must implement the entry system for disciplinary inspection cadres, the registration and filing system, the withdrawal system, the confidentiality system, and the safety responsibility system. This is done to eliminate "darkness under the lamp" ^[12] problems, such as disciplinary personnel leaking information, interfering in reviews and investigations, or collecting evidence in violation of regulations. Third, the regulations and systems carrying all the aforementioned provisions can only truly exert their efficacy if they are effectively executed. This must be guaranteed through regulations such as the Regulations on the Responsibility System for the Execution of Internal Party Regulations of the CPC (Trial), promoting the comprehensive and in-depth implementation of the regulatory system for disciplinary development by improving executive capacity.

III. Contemporary Inspirations for Guaranteeing Disciplinary Development through Internal Party Regulations

For over a century, internal Party regulations and the strengthening of Party discipline have moved in the same direction, ensuring that Party discipline always exerts a binding effect in managing and governing the Party. Scientifically summarizing the basic experience of guaranteeing the strengthening of Party discipline through internal Party regulations offers important inspirations for better serving the comprehensive and strict governance of the Party and advancing the Party's great self-revolution under new historical conditions.

(1) Relying on organizational structure to drive regulatory and institutional development based on the needs of the subjects

Close organization is a unique advantage of a Marxist party. Strict Party discipline has always been an important means for the CPC to forge a rigorous organizational system; establishing regulations around the needs of this organizational system is a distinctive feature of the regulatory system for Party disciplinary development over the past century.

On one hand, the governance goal of strict Party discipline must be implemented as behavioral norms for individual Party members and cadres. From the initial provisions in the Program of the First National Congress of the Party to the Several Guiding Principles for Inner-Party Political Life issued in 1980, and then to the current "Six Disciplines" ^[13], the CPC has always attached importance to concretizing Party disciplinary requirements to achieve the effect of guiding behavior. To improve the regulatory system for disciplinary development in the New Era, we must continue to promote the transformation of requirements for managing and governing the Party into specific disciplinary requirements. This provides a yardstick of right and wrong for Party members and cadres—clarifying what should be done, what can be done, and what is prohibited—thereby converging individual constraints that meet the requirements of the times into the overall potential energy of the Party's disciplinary development.

On the other hand, disciplinary inspection organs are the main functional institutions within the Party's organizational system that specifically promote disciplinary work; internal Party regulations must prioritize guaranteeing the effective operation of these institutions. In 1949, 1955, 1962, and 1979, the Party utilized comprehensive regulations for disciplinary inspection organs—covering functional tasks and institutional setup (which have become a dedicated chapter in the Party Constitution since the 12th National Congress)—as a lead, supplemented by a series of supporting regulations to ensure that disciplinary inspection organs conduct their work according to regulations. To improve the performance and professional level of disciplinary inspection organs in the New Era, we must persist in taking the Party Constitution as the fundamental followed principle. Taking the practical problems encountered in disciplinary inspection work as the driver, we must continuously promote the standardization, legalization, and regularization of disciplinary inspection organs to ensure that they do not lose shape or change character when implementing the CPC Central Committee’s work deployments regarding disciplinary development.

(2) Persisting in making progress while maintaining stability, and innovating in a timely manner on the basis of institutional inheritance

Advancing with the times is the prerequisite for the Party’s systems to maintain their vitality. The process of guaranteeing disciplinary development through internal Party regulations is a process of continuous integration, consolidation, and accumulation of the fine traditions of managing and governing the Party and fresh experience from practical explorations.

For over a century, the regulatory system for the Party's disciplinary development has exhibited characteristics of incremental change. On one hand, institutional evolution possesses strong stability; innovation is often a further extension of the existing institutional accumulation. The Party Constitution amended at the 5th National Congress initially built the content framework for disciplinary sanctions and disciplinary inspection organs; the 1954 Provisions of the CPC Central Committee on Handling the Party Membership of Communist Party Members Subject to Criminal Sanctions initially expounded the principle that, under conditions of being the governing party, Party discipline is stricter than and takes precedence over state law; the Regulations on Disciplinary Actions of the CPC promulgated in 1997 formed the content system of Party discipline for the first time. Key nodes have left lasting marks on the evolutionary process of the regulatory system for disciplinary development and are of crucial significance to the direction of the Party's disciplinary development.

On the other hand, the interaction between structure and agency ^[14] provides inexorable momentum for the innovation of the regulatory system for the Party's disciplinary development. Generations of Chinese Communists, represented primarily by comrades Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, and Xi Jinping, have all proposed new concepts and methods for using internal Party regulations to maintain Party discipline based on summarizing the practical experience of discipline enforcement in various periods, promoting the continuous introduction and refinement of the regulatory system for disciplinary development. It can be seen that while regulations constrain the behavior of Party members and organizations, their evolution is also inseparable from the drive of human practical activities and theoretical achievements. Between accepting regulatory constraints and promoting regulatory innovation, generations of Chinese Communists have exerted full subjective agency, providing key assistance for regulatory change through interaction with institutional structures.

To promote the advancement of the regulatory system for disciplinary development with the times, we must uphold the dialectical relationship between upholding the fundamentals and breaking new ground. We must both persist in the Party’s beneficial long-term experience in strict discipline and adapt to new situations and tasks to deepen institutional reform. The Party's guiding ideology is the scientific guide to action for achieving this requirement. To improve the regulatory system for the Party's disciplinary development at a new historical starting point, we must persist in taking Xi Jinping's Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era as our guide. We must transform the requirements therein regarding strict discipline and governing the Party according to regulations into specific institutional provisions and establish them as institutional following principles. Through the strict implementation of these systems, we can realize the powerful guidance of the Party's guiding ideology over the work of Party disciplinary development.

(3) Strengthening the problem-oriented approach and highlighting priorities under the premise of systematic coordination

Advancing the systematic construction of the internal Party regulatory system is a structural requirement that must be further realized once regulations have accumulated to a considerable quantity. The CPC has always established rules and regulations around the inherent needs of disciplinary development, forming a set of scientific, rigorous, well-supported, and effective regulatory systems for disciplinary development.

To enhance the degree of systematization in the regulatory system for the Party's disciplinary development, we must, on one hand, persist in the problem-oriented approach to disciplinary development. Following the logic of "regulating subjects, regulating behavior, and regulating supervision," we must refine clauses to specifically answer basic questions such as what constitutes discipline, who must observe it, who enforces it, and how to ensure its effective execution. This ensures the balanced development of principled provisions, structural provisions, substantive provisions, procedural provisions, and supervisory provisions, allowing them to link and coordinate organically during institutional execution. On the other hand, establishing regulations is a task that must be targeted. During the revolutionary period, the regulatory system for disciplinary development focused on forging a rigorous organization; during the period of socialist construction, it aimed to enhance the advanced nature and purity of Party members under the conditions of being the governing party; during the new period of reform and opening up, the requirements of the anti-corruption struggle promoted the rapid codification of integrity discipline; since the 18th National Congress, political discipline has been greatly improved against the background of upholding and strengthening the centralized and unified leadership of the CPC Central Committee. It is evident that while improving top-level design and the overall layout, the construction of the regulatory system must move in the same direction as the key tasks facing Party building in different eras. We must comprehensively use means such as formulation, revision, abolition, and interpretation to continuously achieve a dynamic balance between the supply and demand of systems in the field of disciplinary development. We must lead the process of disciplinary development with the "vane of the era," providing a more solid guarantee for advancing the Party's great self-revolution.