Comments on the Summary Report
(June 23, 1952)

To all departments of the CPC Central Committee and the CMC, to the Party Groups of the Central People’s Government; to all Central Bureaus and Sub-bureaus, with further transmission to the Party Committees of provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions; to all Major Military Regions and the Volunteer Army Party Committee, with further transmission to provincial military districts and corps-level Party committees:

We hereby forward to you one copy of the “Summary Report of the CPC Central Commission for Discipline Inspection dated June 22, 1952, on the Party-wide Work of Disciplinary Inspection,” which may be published in Party publications. The Central Committee deems this report to be correct.

The Central Committee
June 23

Note: This refers to the summary report submitted by Zhu De, Secretary of the CPC Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, to Mao Zedong and the Central Committee on June 22, 1952, concerning the Party’s disciplinary inspection work. The report states that the Three-Anti Campaign represented, for our Party, a large-scale, systematically organized, mass-mobilized, and leadership-guided campaign for comprehensive disciplinary review. It served as both an educational and testing opportunity for the broad ranks of cadres, demonstrating that the vast majority were upright, while those who had violated laws and discipline received due punishment. At the same time, the campaign exposed rather serious shortcomings in our work related to disciplinary inspection and cadre management, along with important lessons to be learned: First, in the past, certain Party organizations, upon discovering violations of Party discipline among Party members holding leading positions, failed to address such infractions promptly and in accordance with principle, offering constructive criticism and correction. Moreover, they did not resolutely remove senior cadres who had committed grave errors from their leadership posts, thereby weakening Party discipline and allowing various erroneous tendencies within the Party to further proliferate. Second, some Party organizations maintained poor oversight of their cadres, disregarding feedback from the masses and failing to conduct thorough inspections of their work. Exploiting these weaknesses, unscrupulous elements managed to gain trust and advance their personal agendas. Third, certain departments placed undue emphasis on technical expertise while neglecting political considerations, loosening the Party’s leadership and undermining ideological struggle within the ranks, thus giving rise to serious instances of lawbreaking and disciplinary breaches among cadres.

Therefore, it has become an extremely urgent task to uphold intra-Party democracy, carry out criticism and self-criticism, and combat liberalism. Fourth, we must strengthen disciplinary inspection work, improve organizational and democratic life within the Party, fully harness the role of primary Party branches as strongholds, encourage the exposure and reporting of unlawful and disciplinary-violating conduct by Party members and cadres, and regularly provide education to Party members on the importance of upholding discipline. Fifth, in handling cases of Party member misconduct, we need to overcome two opposing tendencies: leniency that condones wrongdoing, and oversimplification. Sixth, during the constructive phase of the Three-Anti Campaign, Party organizations at all levels may appropriately conduct a campaign to promote compliance with laws and regulations, so as to help Party members and cadres gradually develop habits of public-spiritedness and law-abiding behavior.