案件质量是纪检监察工作高质量发展的生命线，体现着纪检监察工作规范化法治化正规化水平。上海市 松江区纪委监委坚决落实中央纪委印发的《关于进一步加强和规范案件质量评查工作的意见》，把案件 质量评查作为提升办案质效的重要举措，把准评查工作定位、坚守评查工作原则，抓实抓细案件质量评 查工作，持续提升案件办理质效。 坚持问题导向，增强评查实效 建立健全多层次、常态化、全覆盖的案件质量评查机制，不断丰富评查手段方法，精准发现问题，及时 反馈问题，以个案指导带动案件质量整体提升。 创新评查方式。通过协审评查、自查自评、交叉互评等多种方式，树牢案件质量共同体意识，全面进 行"把脉问诊"。开展日常协审评查，对全区基层纪检监察组织立案查处的案件，要求在形成审理报告后 提交区纪委监委案件审理室进行全面审核，列出问题清单，当面反馈问题，全方位常态化进行评查。开 展自查自评，评查组督导各办案部门对照评查标准认真自查自纠，并将案件的评分和自查自纠情况如实 上报至区纪委监委案件审理室。开展交叉互评，在各办案部门自评自查的基础上，由区纪委监委抽查， 通过区纪委监委机关、镇（街道）、派驻机构、国有企业之间交叉互评的方式，对抽查案件做"全身体 ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles highlights the efforts of Xi'an's disciplinary inspection and supervision authorities to enhance the quality of case handling through various measures, including the appointment of internal control officers and the establishment of standardized evidence guidelines [1][2][3][4] Group 2 - Xi'an's disciplinary inspection commission has appointed multiple business backbones as "internal control officers" to conduct preliminary reviews of over 180 cases from April to December 2025, providing more than 400 suggestions for modifications [1] - The commission has developed documents such as the "Evidence Guidelines for Corruption Cases" and the "Case Review Standard Volume" to standardize evidence criteria and streamline case handling processes [2] - Since 2025, a total of 2,714 cases have been reviewed across various districts and institutions, with the evaluation process extending from case initiation to closure, ensuring comprehensive quality checks [3] - Feedback meetings are held promptly after quality evaluations to enforce accountability for rectifying identified issues, with specific timelines set for addressing problems such as unclear facts and non-compliant documentation [4]

中央纪委国家监委网站 鲍爽 案件质量评查是保障和提高案件质量的重要举措，各地纪检监察机关牢牢抓住案件质量评查这个有效抓手， 常态化开展评查，为案件质量精准"把脉问诊"。 重庆市开州区纪委监委构建"审查调查组内审、协作片区初审、审理组复审、审理室务会联审、区纪委常委会 审核"的五级案件质量审核机制，形成层层递进的质量管控体系。 "办案单位首先依据《审查调查阶段案件质量自查表》进行自查；随后，协作片区指派内审员对案件关键事 实、证据、定性量纪及法规适用等进行重点复核；进入审理阶段后，由审理小组开展精细化审核，确保事实 清楚、定性准确、处理恰当；最终，由区纪委常委会进行把关和审议。"该区纪委监委有关负责同志介绍，五 级审核的核心在于压实责任、集体把关，构筑案件质量审核的完整"闭环"。 安徽省和县纪委监委围绕案件查办关键环节，组织办案人员复盘取证突破、定性量纪、文书制作等工作，总 结提炼可复制、可推广的办案思路与方法，切实提升干部的专业素养和攻坚能力。图为近日，该县纪检监察 干部在案件讨论分析会上开展交流研讨。罗凡 摄 习近平总书记在二十届中央纪委五次全会上强调，要持续加强纪检监察工作规范化法治化正规化建设，不断 提 ...

评查过程中，昆明市纪委监委采用"现场反馈+书面清单"双反馈机制，将评查案件暴露的问题和不足梳 理成清单，现场反馈给承办责任人和责任单位，推动建立问题台账和整改台账，研究制定整改措施，明 确整改时限，确保整改落实到位。针对评查中发现的共性问题，该市纪委监委及时在全市系统进行通 报，督促自查自纠。同时，将质量较高的案件和文书纳入"精品案件"和优秀纪检监察文书评选范围，推 广优秀经验做法。 昆明市各级纪检监察机关结合各自工作实际开展案件质量评查，对近期办理的案件"把脉问诊"，总结经 验、取长补短、及时纠偏，进一步推动案件办理质量提升。晋宁区纪委监委组建3个案件质量评查组， 围绕程序手续、事实证据、文书管理等方面逐一审核、量化评分，逐案形成评查记录，详细列明扣分项 目、扣分原因及对应依据，根据最终得分评定案件等次，确保评查结果客观公正，同时，做好督促整改 和跟踪问效。安宁市纪委监委实施"同步评审"和"联合评查"，对街道自办案件在报送审核时同步开展评 查工作，提出指导意见，促进街道纪工委规范办案。该市纪委监委案件审理室、案件监督管理室、信访 室组成联合评查小组，每半年对了结类问题线索和办结类案件开展"联合评查"，深入查 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of meticulous case quality evaluation in the judicial process, highlighting a random review initiative by the Anxi County Procuratorate to enhance legal document accuracy and procedural compliance [1][2]. Group 1: Case Quality Evaluation Initiative - Anxi County Procuratorate initiated a random case quality evaluation activity, reviewing 106 out of over 1500 concluded cases, representing at least 6% of the annual case volume handled by each prosecutor [1][2]. - The evaluation focuses on over ten aspects, including substantive fairness, procedural compliance, case effectiveness, and the implementation of judicial responsibility [1]. Group 2: Identified Issues and Improvement Measures - The evaluation aims to identify common issues in case handling, such as vague legal terminology, improper citation of legal articles, and non-standard documentation practices, which, while not affecting overall quality, are still significant [2]. - The Procuratorate plans to implement corrective and preventive measures based on the identified issues, fostering a rigorous and standardized case handling approach [2]. Group 3: Performance and Learning - In 2025, the Procuratorate handled 69 public interest litigation cases, achieving optimal results with minimal judicial costs, with one case recognized as a typical example by the Supreme People's Procuratorate [2]. - The department is committed to continuous improvement through cross-evaluations of completed cases, sharing insights in business salons, and learning from exemplary cases to enhance case handling quality [2].

Core Viewpoint - Gansu Province's Discipline Inspection and Supervision Commission is enhancing the quality of case handling through a comprehensive evaluation of 20 selected cases, aiming to improve the effectiveness of law-based and disciplined case management [1][2] Group 1: Case Quality Evaluation - The evaluation process involves meticulous review and feedback to address issues affecting case quality, promoting simultaneous rectification across regions [1] - The Commission emphasizes transforming "problem lists" into "result lists" to enhance the capabilities of inspection and investigation personnel [1] - A targeted rectification list is created by analyzing common procedural and management issues identified in previous evaluations [1] Group 2: Training and Capacity Building - The Commission conducts training sessions and provides guidance to ensure that case handling aligns with legal standards and improves overall case quality [2] - There is a focus on addressing common challenges faced by grassroots case handlers through direct feedback and support [2] - The approach includes establishing a problem tracking system, categorizing responsibilities, and ensuring timely rectification of identified issues [2]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint emphasizes the importance of enhancing case quality in the disciplinary inspection and supervision work in Henan Province, focusing on systematic evaluation and improvement mechanisms [1][3] - The Henan Provincial Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision has established a multi-level evaluation system to ensure comprehensive scrutiny of key aspects such as evidence, classification, procedures, documentation, and execution of penalties [1][3] - The evaluation process includes daily assessments and concentrated reviews of self-handled cases, accountability cases, and cases from dispatched agencies, promoting self-examination and correction [1][2] Group 2 - The Anyang Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision has developed a quality control mechanism that includes self-assessment, collaborative evaluation, and follow-up reviews to ensure thorough oversight of case handling [2] - The Hebi City He District Commission has implemented a "multi-level, full coverage" evaluation system, requiring case handlers to conduct self-assessments against four key criteria before case transfer [2] - The Nanyang Municipal Commission focuses on accountability case evaluations, ensuring thorough rectification of identified issues and promoting a culture of continuous improvement among disciplinary inspection personnel [3] Group 3 - The emphasis on "evaluation" and "correction" highlights the dual approach of identifying and rectifying issues, with a focus on establishing a dynamic accountability system for problem resolution [3] - The implementation of a dynamic rectification ledger and regular follow-up reviews ensures that issues are addressed promptly and effectively, preventing recurrence [3][4] - The establishment of a comprehensive case quality system includes guidelines for common issues, training sessions for staff, and targeted support to enhance operational standards [4]

Core Viewpoint - The Central Commission for Discipline Inspection emphasizes the importance of high-quality case handling in the development of discipline inspection and supervision work, highlighting the need for a robust case quality review mechanism to ensure accountability and improvement in the process [1] Group 1: Mechanism Improvement - The review mechanism will be refined by establishing clear evaluation standards and a comprehensive assessment system, breaking down the review content into 17 specific items and creating 76 quantifiable scoring criteria [2] - A daily online and offline review system will be established to strengthen the foundation of case quality assessment, ensuring a systematic approach to identifying and rectifying issues [2] Group 2: Regular Review Practices - Regular assessments of completed cases will shift from semi-annual to quarterly evaluations, allowing for continuous monitoring and comprehensive health checks of the cases handled by direct management units [3] - In 2024, a thorough review of 48 self-handled disciplinary cases will be conducted, focusing on the entire process from initial handling to case file management [3] Group 3: Expanding Review Content - The review process will incorporate both online and offline methods, with specialized training for review personnel to ensure consistency in evaluation standards [4] - The review will also include the examination of disciplinary recommendations and their effectiveness, ensuring that issues identified during case handling are addressed to improve governance [5] Group 4: Post-Review Actions - The review process is seen as a starting point for deeper rectification and mechanism optimization, with regular summaries and notifications issued to address identified issues [6] - A dual mechanism of positive reinforcement and accountability will be implemented to enhance the effectiveness of the review process and ensure compliance with corrective measures [6] Group 5: Training and Guidance - Training programs will be organized annually to enhance the professional capabilities of discipline inspection personnel, focusing on practical case handling and emerging corruption issues [7] - Practical training methods, such as simulated case testing and case discussions, will be employed to improve the skills and knowledge of the staff [7]

Core Viewpoint - The Central Commission for Discipline Inspection and National Supervisory Commission's inspection team is conducting on-site evaluations of disciplinary cases at the China Construction Bank's Xinjiang branch to enhance the quality of case handling and promote high-quality development in discipline inspection and supervision [1][2]. Group 1: Evaluation Mechanism - The inspection team has revised the "Case Quality Evaluation Standards and Scoring Details," focusing on five aspects: evidence, qualitative handling, procedural compliance, management norms, and execution, with 17 evaluation items and 76 scoring criteria [1][2]. - A comprehensive evaluation system has been established, incorporating online evaluations, on-site evaluations, and special evaluations to strengthen the foundation of case quality assessments [1]. Group 2: Evaluation Frequency and Findings - The frequency of evaluations for completed cases has increased from semi-annual to quarterly, allowing for regular monitoring and timely feedback [2]. - From July to August, the inspection team completed a second round of evaluations, identifying issues in qualitative handling and promoting corrective actions [2]. Group 3: Training and Guidance - The inspection team regularly summarizes evaluation results, addressing typical issues such as insufficient evidence and procedural non-compliance, and requires units to implement corrective measures [3]. - Annual training sessions are held for discipline inspection personnel, enhancing their professional capabilities and addressing common quality issues through targeted guidance materials [4]. Group 4: Future Directions - The inspection team aims to further deepen case quality evaluations and innovate evaluation methods to enhance the standardization and legal compliance of discipline inspection work across the organization [4].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of maintaining high-quality standards in case handling within the disciplinary inspection and supervision system, highlighting the role of the Gansu Provincial Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision's case review department in ensuring case quality and providing guidance throughout the process [5][9]. Group 1: Case Quality Assurance - The case quality is described as the "lifeline" of disciplinary enforcement work and a key factor for high-quality development in inspection and supervision [5]. - The case review department has established a comprehensive quality control system through precise reviews, all-around business guidance, and multi-dimensional quality assessments [5][6]. - In September 2022, the case review department was recognized as an advanced collective in the national disciplinary inspection and supervision system [5]. Group 2: Internal Review and Guidance - The case review department is responsible for reviewing cases of violations of party discipline and job-related misconduct, providing opinions on handling or punishment according to regulations [6]. - A tiered review system was established in 2018 to enhance case quality, involving initial reviews by case handlers followed by feedback for further investigation [6][7]. - Regular meetings are held to discuss case reports, ensuring all substantive and procedural disputes are resolved before submission for broader discussion [6][9]. Group 3: Addressing Complex Cases - The case review department plays a crucial role in resolving complex issues within cases, as demonstrated by a specific case involving a provincial enterprise leader accused of serious violations [8]. - The department provided comprehensive reviews and suggestions for further investigation, leading to a more accurate understanding of the case and its implications [8]. Group 4: Business Guidance and Standardization - The case review department has initiated comprehensive business guidance to address the lack of capacity and skills at the grassroots level, drafting work methods and providing templates for case handling [10]. - These initiatives aim to enhance the standardization and legal compliance of grassroots disciplinary inspection work [10][12]. Group 5: Case Quality Evaluation - Case quality evaluations are essential for improving case handling, with a three-tiered evaluation mechanism established to ensure ongoing quality improvement [13]. - The evaluation process includes learning relevant policies, communicating with case handlers, and identifying issues through a structured feedback mechanism [13][14]. - The department has successfully reduced the rate of case returns and the number of serious quality issues, indicating a positive trend in case quality [14].