Comments on Zhu De’s Report on Strengthening the Party’s Disciplinary Inspection Work (January 27, 1952) To Liu, Zhou, Zhu, Chen, and Peng Zhen [1]: Please review.
I concur with this approach.
Comrade An Ziwen [2] is requested to draft, in the name of the Central Committee, a concise directive based on these views [3] (it should not be too lengthy). Mao Zedong January 27

Printed from the manuscript.
Notes [ ] Liu refers to Liu Shaoqi.
Zhou refers to Zhou Enlai.
Zhu refers to Zhu De.
Chen refers to Chen Yun, who at that time served as Secretary of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee.
Peng Zhen was then an alternate member of the Secretariat of the CPC Central Committee. [2] An Ziwen was at the time Deputy Secretary of the CPC Central Commission for Discipline Inspection and Deputy Minister of the Organization Department of the CPC Central Committee. [ ]

Refers to the views put forward by Zhu De, Secretary of the CPC Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, in his report to Mao Zedong dated January 26, 1952, concerning the strengthening of the Party’s disciplinary inspection work.
The report stated: Since their establishment, discipline inspection commissions at all levels have played a certain role and achieved some results in combating violations of law and discipline among Party members, in reinforcing Party discipline, and in consolidating Party organizations.
However, disciplinary inspection work has failed to keep pace with actual needs, primarily due to weak handling of major cases and delays in investigating and addressing ordinary cases.
The main reasons for these problems are that Party committees at various levels have not attached sufficient importance to disciplinary inspection work, nor have they actively led and supported it.
Moreover, secretaries and members of discipline inspection commissions are generally concurrently employed elsewhere, leaving them little or no time to devote to disciplinary inspection duties.
In addition, the administrative organs remain poorly developed, with fewer than half of the required full-time staff in place.
Consequently, investigations into serious cases face even greater difficulties.
To overcome these shortcomings, the following suggestions are made: First, require Party committees at all levels to strengthen their leadership over disciplinary inspection work.
Regular discussions on disciplinary inspection matters should be held at Party committee meetings, and timely instructions should be given in response to reports from discipline inspection commissions.
When examining and handling cases, Party committees should provide strong support to disciplinary inspection personnel.
Second, improve the administrative apparatus and increase the number of full-time staff.
Third, have the Party’s discipline inspection commissions at all levels co-locate with the people’s supervisory committees at corresponding levels, dividing tasks collaboratively and providing mutual assistance.