Group 1 - The core viewpoint emphasizes the importance of case handling in improving governance and political ecology through a comprehensive management approach [1][2] - The New Zheng City Discipline Inspection and Supervision Commission integrates case investigation with political ecology restoration and institutional loophole identification, focusing on in-depth analysis and rectification of individual cases [1] - The commission aims to enhance the political ecology by addressing systemic risks and providing targeted recommendations for improvement to the involved units [1] Group 2 - The commission is committed to establishing long-term governance mechanisms by addressing regulatory blind spots and institutional shortcomings revealed by cases [2] - A total of 249 institutional mechanisms have been established since 2024 to tighten constraints on power and prevent corruption [2] - The commission emphasizes dynamic adjustments to power operation lists and internal control mechanisms to ensure effective governance [2] Group 3 - The commission focuses on education as a means to strengthen the ideological defense against corruption, utilizing both positive and negative examples [3] - A dual approach of "demonstration + warning" is employed in anti-corruption education, promoting local integrity culture while also highlighting disciplinary violations [3] - The integration of modern information technology into warning education enhances its effectiveness, fostering a culture of integrity among party members and officials [3]

Core Points - The central theme emphasizes the importance of addressing corruption and misconduct at the grassroots level to enhance public trust and ensure that development benefits reach the people [1][2][4] Group 1: Focus on Public Concerns - The focus is on identifying and addressing issues that the public strongly opposes, with a commitment to prevent and correct these problems [2][4] - The need for a people-centered approach in the work of disciplinary inspection and supervision is highlighted, ensuring that the concerns of the public are prioritized [2][5] Group 2: Mechanisms for Supervision and Accountability - Various mechanisms such as joint case handling and targeted supervision are proposed to enhance accountability and address "micro-corruption" effectively [4][6] - The establishment of a "problem list" from public feedback is suggested as a way to create a "performance list" for officials, ensuring that their actions are aligned with public needs [10][11] Group 3: Community Engagement and Transparency - Engaging with the community through multiple channels to gather feedback on pressing issues is emphasized, with a focus on transparency in handling complaints [5][9] - The importance of public participation in the supervision process is stressed, allowing citizens to have a say in the effectiveness of anti-corruption measures [9][10] Group 4: Long-term Mechanisms for Improvement - The establishment of long-term mechanisms to protect public interests and address "micro-corruption" is advocated, including the use of technology for better oversight [11][14] - A comprehensive approach that combines case handling with systemic reforms is recommended to address the root causes of corruption and improve governance [13][14]