On the Functional Positioning of Intra-Party Regulations vis-à-vis Intra-Party Power

Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, governing the Party according to regulations has received unprecedented emphasis and attention, becoming the main tone of China’s political and legal life. Research on intra-Party regulations has therefore attracted considerable academic interest, becoming an extremely hot field of study and generating a large number of relatively valuable research results. Research on the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power is among them. Reviewing existing research results, it is not difficult to find that, in the study of the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power, many scholars in the academic community believe that intra-Party regulations are used to standardize and restrict intra-Party power in order to protect the rights of Party members, and that the construction of the intra-Party regulations system should take restricting intra-Party power to protect Party members’ rights as its basic goal; in other words, the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power lies in standardizing and restricting intra-Party power, that is, “controlling the power of Party organizations at all levels and strengthening institutional constraints on leading Party cadres are the top priorities in the construction of CPC intra-Party regulations and the practice of intra-Party rule of law.” [1]1 This quotation is from a Chinese academic source, likely a journal article or monograph, emphasizing the control of Party organizational power and constraints on leading cadres as central to intra-Party rule of law. However, in reality, from the standpoint of instrumentalism and functionalism, the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power is clearly not limited to restricting intra-Party power; it also lies in proclaiming, safeguarding, and even strengthening intra-Party power, thereby upholding the authority of the Party Central Committee and ensuring the Party’s role as the leading core of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics. Precisely because of this, General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “We must give full play to the major role of intra-Party regulations in maintaining the centralized and unified leadership of the Party Central Committee, ensuring the Party’s long-term governance and the nation’s lasting peace and stability, and in advancing the great new project of Party building in the New Era and implementing comprehensive and strict governance of the Party, ensuring that the Party always remains a strong leading core in the historical process of upholding and developing socialism with Chinese characteristics, providing a strong political guarantee for comprehensively building a modern socialist country and realizing the Chinese Dream of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” [2]2 This is a direct quotation from a speech or directive by Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the CPC, underscoring the role of intra-Party regulations in upholding centralized leadership and long-term governance. At present, however, many scholars in the academic community still emphasize the aspect of intra-Party regulations standardizing and restricting intra-Party power in their understanding of the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power, while relatively neglecting their aspect of proclaiming, safeguarding, and strengthening intra-Party power. This has become a notable deficiency in the study of the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations within the academic field. Based on this, this article intends to explore the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power, hoping to contribute modestly to a more objective and rational understanding of the functions of intra-Party regulations and a more scientific grasp of the goals of constructing the intra-Party regulations system.

党的十八大以来，依规治党受到前所未有的强调和重视，已经成为我国政治法律生活的主基调。党内法规研究因此备受学界关注，成为当下极火热的一个研究领域，并形成了一大批较有价值的研究成果。有关党内法规之于党内权力功能定位的研究就在其中。而梳理现有研究成果则不难发现，在有关党内法规之于党内权力功能定位的研究方面，学界不少学者认为，党内法规是用来规范和限制党内权力以保障党员权利的，党内法规制度建设应当以制约党内权力以保障党员权利为基本目标；换言之，党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位在于规范和制约党内权力，即“控制党的各级组织的权力，加强对党员领导干部的制度约束，是中国共产党党内法规建设与党内法治实践的重中之重”。然而实际上，站在工具主义与功用论的立场上，党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位显然并不仅仅在于规限党内权力，还在于宣示、保障甚至强化党内权力，以此来维护党中央权威，确保党作为中国特色社会主义事业领导核心的地位。正因为如此，习近平总书记指出：“要发挥好党内法规在维护党中央集中统一领导、保障党长期执政和国家长治久安方面的重大作用，在推进新时代党的建设新的伟大工程、落实全面从严治党方面的重大作用，确保党在坚持和发展中国特色社会主义的历史进程中始终成为坚强领导核心，为全面建设社会主义现代化国家、实现中华民族伟大复兴的中国梦提供坚强政治保证。”但目前而言，学界不少学者在党内法规之于党内权力功能定位的认识上还存在更强调党内法规规范和限制党内权力的面向，而相对忽视其宣示、保障和强化党内权力的面向。这已成为党内法规学界在党内法规功能定位研究方面的一个显见不足。基于此，本文拟就党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位加以探讨，以期为学界更为客观理性地理解党内法规之功能和更为科学地把握党内法规制度建设之目标略尽微力。

I. Current Status of Academic Research on the Functional Positioning of Intra-Party Regulations vis-à-vis Intra-Party Power

一、学界有关党内法规之于党内权力功能定位的研究现状

Intra-Party regulations are norms with a legal nature within the Party and are an indispensable and important component of the contemporary socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics. Intra-Party power refers to the political qualifications and capabilities that the Party and its organizations, as a collective of Party members, enjoy within the Party to require Party members and their subordinate organizations to fulfill certain obligations. Its essence is “the power of influence or control that Party organizations at all levels, as subjects of power, have over subordinate Party organizations and all Party cadres and members.” [3]3 This definition of intra-Party power is drawn from Chinese legal or political scholarship, focusing on the hierarchical influence of Party organizations. The Communist Party of China is the leading core of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and Party leadership is the most essential feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics. This determines the basic political logic, which is also a rule-of-law logic, that “the key to handling China’s affairs well lies in the Party” and “to govern the country well, the Party must first be governed well, and to govern the Party well, strictness is essential.” Under this logic, intra-Party power inevitably becomes the power requiring the most attention within China’s power system, that is, “intra-Party power is the core of China’s power system,” [4]4 This assertion reflects a common view in Chinese political discourse that intra-Party power is the central axis of China’s overall power structure. and it also inevitably becomes a fundamental issue that intra-Party regulations must address.

党内法规就是党内具有法律性质的规范，是当代中国特色社会主义法治体系不可或缺的重要组成部分。党内权力，则是指党及其组织作为党的成员之集合在党内享有的、要求党员及其下级组织履行一定义务的政治资格与能力，其实质是“各级党组织作为权力主体，对下级党组织和全体党员干部享有的支配力或影响力”。中国共产党是中国特色社会主义事业的领导核心，党的领导是中国特色社会主义最本质的特征。这决定了“办好中国的事情，关键在党”以及“治国必先治党，治党务必从严”的基本政治逻辑同时也是法治逻辑。而在这样的逻辑之下，党内权力必然成为我国权力体系中最需要关注的权力，即“党内权力是我国权力体系的核心”，也必然成为党内法规须关注的基本问题。

From the perspective of jurisprudence, “power” is one of the most common discourses among both officials and the public in Chinese society and a decisive dominant force. As a norm of social behavior, one of the core tasks of law is to correctly approach and handle power—whether this power is state power or organizational public power. As a special type of law, one of the core tasks of intra-Party regulations is to correctly approach and handle intra-Party power. Precisely because of this, research on the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power has become an important issue that intra-Party regulation research must directly confront, and many research results have touched upon this issue. Reviewing existing research results, it is not difficult to find that, regarding the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power, many scholars believe that the basic essence of modern rule of law is to safeguard rights by standardizing and restricting power. As a basic form of institutional norms in China’s rule-of-law system, intra-Party regulations must also follow this basic essence of rule of law, practicing the basic logic of rights protection in the intra-Party rule-of-law practice of Party governance according to regulations. In other words, as a type of law, the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations should lie in standardizing and restricting intra-Party power. These scholars believe that “intra-Party regulations are the inevitable product of power restriction and rights protection.” [5]5 This quotation is from a Chinese academic work arguing that intra-Party regulations arise from the need to restrict power and protect rights. The value of the existence of intra-Party regulations lies in “restricting power with power, achieving the rule of law in intra-Party governance.” [6]6 This phrase, “restricting power with power,” echoes Montesquieu’s separation of powers but is applied here to intra-Party governance. “The core essence of governing the Party according to regulations is to restrict intra-Party power through the effective implementation of intra-Party regulations.” [7]7 This statement defines “governing the Party according to regulations” (依规治党) as fundamentally about limiting intra-Party power. Based on this, these scholars point out that the construction of the intra-Party regulations system should “take power restriction as the main line and improve the construction of intra-Party regulations.” [8]8 This is a policy recommendation from Chinese legal scholarship advocating for power restriction as the guiding principle in drafting intra-Party regulations. To this end, it is necessary to strengthen the authority of the Party Constitution, guide the construction of the intra-Party regulations system through the Party Constitution, and restrict intra-Party power within the framework stipulated by intra-Party regulations, that is, “while establishing the authority of the Party Constitution, by establishing the principle of democratic centralism in the Party Constitution, strengthen the construction of the intra-Party regulations system, so that the exercise of power is subject to more effective restriction and supervision.” [9]9 This combines the authority of the Party Constitution with the principle of democratic centralism as mechanisms for power restriction. In other words, many in the academic community believe that the functional positioning of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power lies in standardizing and restricting intra-Party power. And from the perspective of the Party’s centenary history, intra-Party regulations have indeed made extensive efforts in standardizing and restricting intra-Party power, achieving remarkable results. This is reflected in the practice of the intra-Party regulations system, where “intra-Party regulations have continuously strengthened the power restriction and supervision system, forming a relatively tight intra-Party supervision system.” [10]10 This refers to the development of a comprehensive intra-Party supervision system, including bodies like the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection.

站在法理学的视域中，“权力”是中国社会决定性的主导力量和官民两方面最常见的话语之一。法作为一种社会行为规范，其核心任务之一就在于正确对待和处理权力——无论这种权力是国家权力还是组织型公权力。党内法规作为一种特殊类型的法，其核心任务之一是正确对待和处理党内权力。正因为如此，有关党内法规之于党内权力功能定位的研究成为党内法规研究必然直面的一个重要问题，不少研究成果都触及这一问题。梳理现有研究成果则不难发现，在党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位上，不少学者认为，现代法治的基本要义是通过规范和制约权力来保障权利，作为我国法治体系的基本制度规范形式，党内法规亦须遵循法治的这一基本要义，在党规之治的党内法治实践中践行权利保障的基本逻辑。易言之，党内法规作为一种法，其功能定位应当在于规范和制约党内权力。这些学者认为，“党内法规是权力约束和权利保障的必然产物”。党内法规存在的价值在于“以权力制约权力，实现党内治理的法治化”。“依规治党的核心要义就是通过党内法规的有效实施来限制党内权力”。基于此，这些学者指出，党内法规制度建设应当“以权力制约为主线，完善党内法规建设”。为此，必须强化党章权威，通过党章引领党内法规制度建设，将党内权力限制在党内法规制度规定的框架之中，亦即“在树立党章权威的同时，通过在党章中确立民主集中制原则，强化党内法规制度体系建设，使权力运行受到更加效的制约和监督”。换言之，学界不少人认为，党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位在于规范和制约党内权力。而从建党百年的历史来看，党内法规也的确在规范和制约党内权力方面做了大量努力，取得了显著成效。体现在党内法规制度实践中，“党内法规不断强化权力制约与监督体系，并形成了较为严密的党内监督体系”。

Power and rights are a pair of concepts that arise together; any power corresponds to corresponding rights. In terms of their jurisprudential status, rights, as “a means stipulated or implied in legal norms, realized in legal relations, by which subjects obtain benefits through relatively free acts or omissions,” [11]11 This is a standard definition of rights in Chinese jurisprudence textbooks, emphasizing legal norms and relational benefits. are a foundational category of modern jurisprudence. And “rights protection is the functional tendency of modern law.” [12]12 This phrase reflects a general principle in modern legal theory that law’s primary function is to protect rights. Precisely because of this, jurisprudence is often called the science of rights, a discipline that discovers, studies, and promotes the realization of rights. In the perspective of contemporary jurisprudence, the core mission of law lies in maintaining, safeguarding, and realizing people’s rights. The emphasis and esteem placed on rights in contemporary jurisprudence leads people, when focusing on and discussing national law, to often regard standardizing and restricting public power to safeguard and realize private rights as the primary function of law vis-à-vis power, while relatively neglecting another aspect of law’s function vis-à-vis power, namely, law’s function of proclaiming and safeguarding public power. In reality, regarding power, the functional positioning of law lies not only in standardizing and restricting power to ensure its correct exercise and better protect citizens’ rights, but also in proclaiming and safeguarding public power to form and maintain basic social order and achieve social governance. The reason is that order is the foundation of human social existence and the prerequisite for people’s survival and development. “In the common life of humanity, people would rather tolerate problematic, purposeless, or even ‘unjust’ legal rules than see a state completely devoid of legal control (without legal judgment). … Chaos is sometimes more inhumane and harder to tolerate than organized tyranny.” [13]13 This quotation is from a work on legal philosophy, likely by a Western or Chinese scholar, emphasizing the value of legal order over chaos. The demand of human society for order determines that social life inevitably requires a certain authority to guide the establishment of order, and law undertakes the mission of confirming and maintaining these “authorities.” By granting corresponding organizations or individuals power, law makes these organizations or individuals authorities that people can trust, thereby achieving the goal of creating normal social order and ensuring people’s survival and development. In this sense, law actually has the function of proclaiming, confirming, and safeguarding power.

权力是与权利相伴而生的一组概念，任何权力都对应着相应的权利。就其法学地位而言，权利作为“规定或隐含在法律规范中，实现于法律关系中的，主体以相对自由的作为或不作为的方式获得利益的一种手段”，是现代法学的基石性范畴。而“权利保障则是现代法的功能趋向”。正因为如此，法学通常也被人们称为权利之学，是发现、研究权利并推进权利实现的学问。在当代法学的视野中，法的核心使命就在于维护、保障并实现人们的权利。当代法学对于权利的强调和崇尚使得人们在关注和谈论国家法律时，往往将规范和制约公权力以保障和实现私权利作为法之于权力的首要功能，而相对忽视法之于权力功能的另一面向，即法对于权力的宣示和保障功能。实际上，对于权力来说，法的功能定位不仅在于规范和制约权力以确保权力正确行使，更好地保护公民权利，同时也在于宣示和保障公权力以形成并维护基本的社会秩序，实现社会治理。原因在于，秩序是人类社会存在的基础，是人们生存和发展的前提，“在人类的共同生活中，人们宁可容忍有问题的、不符合目的的或者根本就是‘不公正的’法律规则的存在，也不愿意看到完全失去法律控制（没有法律判断）的状态。……混乱有时比有组织的暴政更不人道，更难以容忍”。人类社会对于秩序的需求，决定了社会生活中必然需要一定的权威来引导建立秩序，而法律则担当了确认和维护这些“权威”的使命，它通过赋予相应的组织或个人以权力，使这些组织或个人成为人们可以信赖的权威，从而达到打造正常社会秩序、保障人们生存和发展的目的。在此意义上，法实际上具有宣示、确认和保障权力的功能。

As a discipline grounded in rights, contemporary jurisprudence relatively focuses more on the law’s protection and safeguarding of rights. Since there is a correlation between restricting public power and safeguarding private rights, regulating and constraining power to prevent it from excessively squeezing and limiting rights has become a widely recognized objective need for protecting citizens’ rights. This has led to a relatively common habitual thinking among domestic legal researchers that the functional orientation of law lies in safeguarding and protecting private rights. This habitual thinking has directly influenced academic research on the functional orientation of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power, causing many domestic scholars, when discussing issues related to intra-Party regulations, to generally note their function of regulating and constraining intra-Party power, yet relatively overlook another dimension of the function of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power, namely, the aspect of intra-Party regulations proclaiming, safeguarding, and even strengthening intra-Party power. Theoretically, if our grasp of the functional orientation of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power only focuses on one point while neglecting the other, then in the practice of building the intra-Party regulations system, it will easily lead to a partial view, causing the construction of the intra-Party regulations system to deviate, thereby harming rule-based governance over the Party, affecting the strengthening of the Party’s leadership in the New Era and the scientific advancement of the great new project of Party building, and consequently constraining the building of the Party’s long-term governance capacity and hindering the realization of the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity. For this reason, it is necessary to scientifically and rationally grasp the functional orientation of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power.

作为以权利为基石的学问，当代法学相对更为关注法律对于权利的维护和保障。由于限制公权力与保障私权利之间存在着相关性，规范和制约权力以防范权力过多地挤压和限制权利，成为人们普遍公认的、保障公民权利的客观需要。这使得法的功能定位在于维护和保障私权利逐渐成为国内法学研究者较为普遍的一种习惯性思维。这一习惯性思维显然直接影响到了学界对于党内法规之于党内权力功能定位的研究，令国内不少学者在探讨党内法规相关问题时，尽管普遍注意到了党内法规之于党内权力的规范和制约功能，但却相对忽略党内法规之于党内权力功能的另一面向，即党内法规宣示、保障甚至强化党内权力的一面。而从理论上来说，如果我们对党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位之把握只注意到了其中的一点而忽视了另外一点，则在党内法规制度建设的实践中就会很容易以偏概全，使党内法规制度建设走偏，从而有害于依规治党，影响新时代党的领导之强化以及党的建设新的伟大工程之科学推进，进而会制约党的长期执政能力建设，阻碍国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的实现。为此，必须要科学理性地把握党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位。

II. The Two-Dimensionality of the Functional Orientation of Intra-Party Regulations vis-à-vis Intra-Party Power

二、党内法规之于党内权力功能定位的两维性

The “Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Comprehensively Advancing the Rule of Law” adopted at the Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the CPC [14]14 The Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the CPC was held in October 2014; its central theme was comprehensively advancing the rule of law. explicitly incorporated intra-Party regulations into the socialist rule-of-law system. Against this backdrop, the status and nature of intra-Party regulations as a type of law have been widely recognized by the academic community. Since intra-Party regulations are a type of law, they must inevitably directly confront the issue of how to correctly treat and handle power. This determines that the study of intra-Party regulations, which takes the specialized study of the phenomenon of intra-Party regulations as its mission, must seriously consider the functional orientation of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power, namely: as a norm with an unquestionable legal nature within the Party, what functional orientation should intra-Party regulations have with respect to intra-Party power? Is it to regulate and constrain intra-Party power, or to proclaim and safeguard intra-Party power? The resolution of this issue undoubtedly directly determines the direction and goals of the construction of the intra-Party regulations system. Specifically: if the functional orientation of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power lies in regulating and constraining intra-Party power, then the direction of constructing the intra-Party regulations system should obviously focus on safeguarding, maintaining, and realizing the rights of Party members, ensuring the principal status of Party members within the Party, and supervising and constraining intra-Party power by strengthening the rights of Party members. Conversely, if the functional orientation of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power lies in proclaiming and safeguarding intra-Party power, then the direction of constructing the intra-Party regulations system should obviously focus on highlighting and strengthening the obligations of Party members, clearly conferring corresponding powers and functions on the Party and its organizations, emphasizing the authority of Party organizations, especially the Party Central Committee, and ensuring the efficient exercise of intra-Party power, that is, achieving “upholding and strengthening the comprehensive leadership of the Party, resolutely safeguarding General Secretary Xi Jinping’s core position on the Party Central Committee and in the Party as a whole, and resolutely upholding the authority and centralized, unified leadership of the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core.” [15]15 This is a standard formulation of the “Two Upholds” (两个维护), a core political requirement under Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. These two directions of constructing the intra-Party regulations system evidently have different effects and significance for the Party’s leadership and Party building, and even for comprehensively advancing the rule of law and enhancing the national governance system and governance capacity. The author believes that, from a positive perspective, the functional orientation of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power exhibits clear two-dimensionality, and its scientific orientation should be: intra-Party regulations must both proclaim and safeguard intra-Party power, and at the same time regulate and limit intra-Party power, and their institutional design must strive to achieve a balance between the two.

党的十八届四中全会通过的《中共中央关于全面推进依法治国若干重大问题的决定》明确将党内法规纳入社会主义法治体系。在这一背景下，党内法规作为一种法的地位和性质得到了学界普遍认可。而党内法规既然是一种法，就势必需要直面如何正确对待和处理权力的问题。这决定了以专门研究党内法规现象为使命的党内法规学必须要认真考量党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位，即：作为一种在党内具有毋庸置疑之法律性质的规范，党内法规对于党内权力而言应当具有什么样的功能定位？是在于规范和制约党内权力，还是在于宣示和保障党内权力？该问题的解决无疑直接决定着党内法规制度建设的方向和目标。具体而言：假如党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位在于规范和制约党内权力，则党内法规制度建设的方向显然就应侧重于保障、维护和实现党员权利，确保党员的党内主体地位，通过强化党员权利来监督和制约党内权力；而反之，假如党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位在于宣示和保障党内权力，则党内法规制度建设的方向显然就应侧重于突出和强化党员义务，明确赋予党及其组织相应的职权，强调党组织尤其是党中央的权威性，保障党内权力的高效行使，亦即做到“坚持和加强党的全面领导，坚决维护习近平总书记党中央的核心、全党的核心地位，坚决维护以习近平同志为核心的党中央权威和集中统一领导”。党内法规制度建设的这两个方向对于党的领导和党的建设，乃至对于全面推进依法治国与提升国家治理体系和治理能力而言，其作用和意义显然是不同的。笔者以为，从实然的角度来说，党内法规之于党内权力的功能定位存在着明显的两维性，其科学定位应当是：党内法规既要宣示和保障党内权力，同时又要规范和限制党内权力，其制度设计须努力实现两者之间的平衡。

(I) Proclaiming and Safeguarding Intra-Party Power is the Primary Function of Intra-Party Regulations vis-à-vis Intra-Party Power

（一）宣示并保障党内权力是党内法规之于党内权力的首要功能

Proclaiming and safeguarding intra-Party power is the foundational value of the existence of intra-Party regulations, and also the primary function of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power. Intra-Party regulations are first and foremost a type of Party norm, and also an extremely important type of political norm, bearing the function of political norms. In a situation where politics requires and cannot do without authority, shaping and maintaining a recognized authority to facilitate Party unity and lead its organizational members in engaging in political activities is an indispensable function of Party norms as a type of political norm. From a political science perspective, political parties, as the main actors in contemporary political activities, arise and exist based on specific political demands. To achieve their own political goals, political parties need to unite and lead their members in engaging in political activities. For this reason, they must possess necessary power, and use this power to influence and direct their members. This is an objective need for political parties to engage in political activities. Rules and regulations are an important guarantee for all political parties to establish their own internal power structures, thereby conducting self-management, exerting organizational capacity, and achieving organizational goals. From the perspective of Party governance, “as a political organization, the strength of a political party depends on the degree of its organization.” [16]16 The source of this quotation is not identified in the original text. Highly institutionalized organizations usually have stronger defenses than weakly institutionalized ones, because the former’s means of controlling environmental uncertainty are concentrated in the “center,” rather than dispersed among various sub-groups. Law, as a product of institutional rationality, inherently has the function of maintaining and strengthening organizational power. With respect to power, the functional orientation of law lies not only in regulating and constraining power to ensure its correct exercise and better protect citizens’ rights, but also in proclaiming and safeguarding public power to form and maintain basic social order; indeed, the latter (i.e., proclaiming and safeguarding power to maintain order) is the foundation of the former (i.e., regulating and constraining the exercise of power to better protect rights). Intra-Party regulations are “rules within the Communist Party of China that have the significance of law,” [17]17 The source of this quotation is not identified in the original text. and are the institutional choice of the Party to establish the structure and rules of intra-Party power, ensure the efficient operation of intra-Party power, and achieve self-management. Intra-Party power, as a type of organizational power, is the guarantee for ensuring the normal existence and operation of the ruling Party and its organizations, and for leading the broad masses of Party members in engaging in political activities. As the internal rules and regulations of the ruling Party, intra-Party regulations must institutionally confirm intra-Party power—especially the power of the Party Central Committee. This is an objective need to consolidate and strengthen intra-Party consensus, and to enable the Party’s organizations, especially the central organizations, to have the qualifications and ability to unite and lead the entire Party in carrying out political activities.

宣示并保障党内权力是党内法规存在的基础性价值，也是党内法规之于党内权力的首要功能。党内法规首先是一种政党规范，也是一种极为重要的政治规范，承担着政治规范的功能。而在政治需要且离不开权威的情况下，塑造并维护一个公认权威以利于政党团结，并带领其组织成员从事政治活动，是作为一种政治规范的政党规范必须具备的功能。站在政治学的角度上，政党作为当代政治活动的主体，是基于特定政治诉求而产生和存在的。为了实现自身的政治目标，政党需要团结和带领其成员一起从事政治活动。为此，她必须拥有必要的权力，并以此权力来影响和支配其成员。这是政党从事政治活动的客观需要。而规章制度则是所有政党确立自身内部权力结构，从而进行自我管理，发挥组织能力，实现组织目标的重要保障。从政党治理的角度来说，“作为政治组织，一个政党的力量强弱取决于组织化程度的高低”。高度制度化的组织通常比那些弱制度化的组织拥有更强的防御，因为前者控制环境不确定的手段集中在“中央”手中，而不是分散于各次级团体中。而法作为制度理性的产物，则先天具有维护和强化组织力量的功能。对于权力而言，法的功能定位不仅在于规范和制约权力以确保权力正确行使、更好地保护公民权利，同时也在于宣示和保障公权力以形成并维护基本的社会秩序，甚至后者（亦即宣示和保障权力以维护秩序）是前者（亦即规范和制约权力行使以更好地保护权利）的基础。党内法规是“中国共产党内部具有法的意义的规则”，是党借以确立党内权力结构与规则，确保党内权力高效运转，实现自我管理的制度性选择。党内权力作为一种组织型权力，是确保执政党及其组织得以正常存在和运行，并带领广大党员从事政治活动的保障。党内法规作为执政党内部的规章制度，必须从制度上确认党内权力——尤其是党中央的权力。这是凝聚并强化党内共识，令党的组织尤其是中央组织有资格且有能力团结和带领全党开展政治活动的客观需要。

Unlike state law, which is characterized by a rights-based approach and emphasizes the protection of citizens’ rights, intra-Party regulations place greater emphasis on the primacy of obligations. While respecting and safeguarding the rights of Party members, intra-Party regulations highlight the priority of members fulfilling their obligations, strengthening members’ duties and responsibilities toward the organization. In this way, they proclaim and safeguard the Party’s power within its own ranks, uphold the authority of the Party Central Committee, and ensure consistency in the actions of the entire Party. “The introduction and emphasis on intra-Party regulations are intended to strengthen control and enhance organizational discipline and orderliness.” [18]18 See, e.g., Wang Hongzhi, “On the Standardization and Restriction of Intra-Party Power by Intra-Party Regulations,” *Seeking Truth*, 2017, no. 6. Moreover, “strict discipline is a glorious tradition and unique strength of the Party. The more complex the situation the Party faces and the more arduous the tasks it shoulders, the more it must strengthen discipline building and uphold the Party’s unity and solidarity, ensuring the entire Party acts with unified will, unified action, and coordinated progress.” [19]19 Ibid. Only by clearly proclaiming, safeguarding, and even strengthening the Party’s power within its own ranks can the Party form a unified will, consistently remain a strong political fortress, ensure concerted action by the entire Party, and possess executive capacity and combat effectiveness. For this reason, since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the Party Central Committee has attached great importance to and repeatedly emphasized rule-based governance of the Party, continuously advancing the construction of the intra-Party regulations system. It has revised or formulated a large number of intra-Party regulations, including the Constitution of the Communist Party of China, the Regulations of the Communist Party of China on the United Front Work, and the Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Requesting Instructions and Reporting on Major Matters. It has explicitly enshrined as basic provisions of intra-Party regulations the requirement to “firmly establish political awareness, awareness of the big picture, core awareness, and alignment awareness; steadfastly uphold confidence in the path, theory, system, and culture of socialism with Chinese characteristics; resolutely uphold General Secretary Xi Jinping’s core position on the Party Central Committee and in the Party as a whole; and resolutely uphold the authority and centralized, unified leadership of the Party Central Committee.” It demands that the broad masses of Party members and Party organizations at all levels strictly observe political discipline, “abide by the rules in political direction, political stance, political speech, and political conduct; consciously uphold the Party’s leadership; consciously maintain alignment with the Party Central Committee; and consciously safeguard the authority of the Party Central Committee.” [20]20 “Rule by one person alone” (yiyantang) refers to a situation where a single leader monopolizes decision-making, suppressing democratic discussion and collective leadership within the Party. The motivation lies in emphasizing and leveraging the function of intra-Party regulations to proclaim and safeguard intra-Party power. By ensuring and strengthening intra-Party power, especially the power of the Party Central Committee, the Party consistently maintains unified steps and unified action, always remaining the strong leading core of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics.

与国家法律以权利本位为特征、突出保障公民权利不同，党内法规更强调义务优位。党内法规在尊重和保障党员权利的基础上更突出党员履行义务的优先性，强化党员对于组织的义务与责任，以此来宣示和保障党在其自身内部的权力，维护党中央权威，确保全党行动的一致性。“党内法规的提出和重视是为了强化管控，增加组织性和纪律性”。而“纪律严明是党的光荣传统和独特优势。党面临的形势越复杂、肩负的任务越艰巨，就越要加强纪律建设，越要维护党的团结统一，确保全党统一意志、统一行动、步调一致前进”。只有明确宣示、保障甚至强化党在其自身内部的权力，才能够使党形成统一的意志，始终成为一个坚强的政治堡垒，确保全党一致行动，具有执行力和战斗力。正因为如此，党的十八大以来党中央高度重视并反复强调依规治党，持续推进党内法规制度建设，修改或制定了包括《中国共产党章程》《中国共产党统一战线工作条例》《中国共产党重大事项请示报告条例》等在内的大量党内法规，明确把“牢固树立政治意识、大局意识、核心意识、看齐意识，坚定中国特色社会主义道路自信、理论自信、制度自信、文化自信，坚决维护习近平总书记党中央的核心、全党的核心地位，坚决维护党中央权威和集中统一领导”落实为党内法规的基本规定，要求广大党员和各级党组织严守政治纪律，“在政治方向、政治立场、政治言论、政治行为方面守好规矩，自觉坚持党的领导，自觉同党中央保持一致，自觉维护党中央权威”，其动机就在于强调并发挥党内法规宣示和保障党内权力的功能，通过确保并强化党内权力尤其是党中央权力，使党始终统一步调、统一行动，始终成为中国特色社会主义事业坚强领导核心。

(II) Regulating and Restricting Intra-Party Power Is an Important Function of Intra-Party Regulations vis-à-vis Intra-Party Power

（二）规范和制约党内权力是党内法规之于党内权力的重要功能

Regulating and restricting intra-Party power is a significant value of the existence of intra-Party regulations and an indispensable function of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power. Intra-Party regulations are an important component of the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics and are a type of rule-of-law norm. This inherently means that, in addition to bearing the function of political norms—especially proclaiming and safeguarding intra-Party power to ensure the authority of the Party Central Committee and strengthen the Party’s leadership over its members—intra-Party regulations must also bear the function of rule-of-law norms. And restricting power to the greatest extent possible to safeguard rights is the basic function of rule-of-law norms.

规范和制约党内权力是党内法规存在的重要价值，也是党内法规之于党内权力不可或缺的重要功能。党内法规是中国特色社会主义法治体系的重要组成部分，是一种法治规范。这注定了党内法规除了承担政治规范的功能——尤其是宣示和保障党内权力以确保党中央权威和强化党对其成员的领导——之外，也必然承担着法治规范的功能。而对权力进行约制以最大限度地保障权利，则是法治规范的基本功能。

From the perspective of the rule of law, “all those who possess power are prone to abuse it; this is an eternal experience.” [21]21 Xi “Power, regardless of its size, is likely to be abused if it is not subject to restriction and supervision.” [22] Intra-Party power, as a type of organizational power, is no exception—indeed, it is even more so, especially given that the Party, as the leading core of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics, holds governing power. If intra-Party power cannot be properly regulated and restricted, it will inevitably be abused. The abuse of intra-Party power will not only directly lead to corruption, infringe upon the interests of all Party members and the broad masses of the people, severely damage Party-mass relations, undermine the authority of the Party Central Committee, tarnish the Party’s image, weaken its combat effectiveness, and constrain its capacity for long-term governance; it will also more easily cause decision-making errors, lead the Party’s cause astray, and bring direct negative impacts on national development and national rejuvenation. As some scholars have pointed out, “the process of exercising Party power is a process of continuously enhancing or diminishing the Party’s prestige; the standardized exercise of Party power that achieves positive social outcomes helps enhance the Party’s prestige and further consolidates the ruling Party’s leadership position. However, if Party power is exercised improperly (including corruption in public power or within the ruling Party), it will damage the Party’s prestige; the weakening of the Party’s prestige will in turn directly affect the credibility of Party power and offset the positive social effects of its exercise.” [23] “When intra-Party power is overly concentrated, the principal status of Party members is disregarded, and the legalization of Party members’ obligations and rights becomes hollowed out, making it impossible to effectively prevent decision-making errors and power corruption.” [24]

站在法治的视域中，“一切有权力的人都容易滥用权力，这是万古不易的一条经验”。“权力不论大小，只要不受制约和监督，都有可能被滥用”。党内权力作为一种组织型权力也不例外，甚至更不例外——尤其是在党作为中国特色社会主义事业领导核心而拥有执政权的情况下。如果党内权力不能受到应有的规范和制约，将不可避免地会被滥用。党内权力的滥用不仅会直接招致腐败，侵害全体党员以及广大人民群众的利益，严重破坏党群关系，损害党中央权威，影响党的形象，削弱党的战斗力，制约党的长期执政能力建设，更容易造成决策失误，使党的事业走弯路，并对国家发展和民族复兴带来直接负面影响。正如有学者指出的，“党权行使的过程是不断增强或减弱党威的过程；党权的规范行使取得了积极社会效果有助于提升党威，同时会进一步巩固执政党的领导地位。但是，如果党权行使不当（包括公共权力或执政党内部的腐败现象），便会折损党威；而党威的削弱会反过来直接影响党权的公信力，以及抵消党权行使的积极社会效果”。“党内权力过于集中，党员的主体地位遭到漠视，党员义务和权利的法律化也会随之虚化，也就无法有效防止决策失误和权力腐败”。

In this regard, intra-Party power needs to be regulated and restricted. The purpose of regulating and restricting intra-Party power is to ensure the correct exercise of intra-Party power, preventing it from becoming overly concentrated, arbitrary, or abused, thereby avoiding negative impacts on the Party’s leadership, Party building, and even national governance. Regulating and restricting intra-Party power helps promote the standardization of intra-Party power exercise, enhance the authority of intra-Party power, and is conducive to better proclaiming, safeguarding, and even strengthening intra-Party power. Therefore, while using intra-Party regulations to proclaim, safeguard, and even strengthen its own power, the Party must also use intra-Party regulations to regulate and control the establishment and exercise of these powers. Intra-Party regulations, as normative products and institutional achievements of the Party applying rule-of-law thinking to fulfill the requirements of governing the Party, are an inevitable choice for the Party’s self-restraint and self-control of power. As some scholars have pointed out, “intra-Party regulations, as a special type of social law, share with state law the function of regulating and restricting power.” [25] By clarifying the conditions, procedures, purposes, and responsibilities for the exercise of intra-Party power, intra-Party regulations delineate the scope and boundaries of intra-Party power exercise, ensuring that the exercise of intra-Party power is based on corresponding rules and institutions. This enables the broad masses of Party members and even ordinary citizens to supervise the exercise of intra-Party power through the explicit provisions of intra-Party regulations, ensuring that intra-Party power is not abused, achieving the Party’s self-restraint and self-control of power, and making the Party a qualified and capable leadership subject, ensuring that the exercise of its power always adheres to the original aspiration and founding mission of “seeking happiness for the Chinese people and rejuvenation for the Chinese nation.” [26] In other words, relative to the basic function of proclaiming and safeguarding intra-Party power, another important function of intra-Party regulations lies in regulating and restricting intra-Party power, thereby ensuring that the Party always maintains strict self-discipline and becomes a qualified leadership subject. In this sense, “the fundamental purpose of formulating intra-Party regulations is to realize the self-discipline of Chinese Communists, thereby laying a firm leadership foundation for the realization of the modernization of national governance.” [27] Precisely based on this, since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has continuously strengthened the construction

就此而言，党内权力需要被规范和制约。规范和制约党内权力的目的在于确保党内权力正确行使，避免党内权力过于集中、专断和被滥用，以致对党的领导和党的建设乃至国家治理带来负面影响。规范和制约党内权力有助于促进党内权力行使的规范性，提升党内权力的权威性，有利于更好地宣示、保障乃至强化党内权力。因此，党在借助党内法规宣示、保障乃至强化自身权力的同时，也必须借助党内法规对这些权力的设置和行使进行规范和控制。党内法规作为党运用法治思维践行管党治党要求的规范产物与制度成果，是党进行自我约束和自我控权的必然选择。正如有学者指出的，“党内法规作为一种特殊的社会法，它与国家法一样具有规范和制约权力的功能”。党内法规通过明确党内权力行使的条件、程序、目的以及违规行使的责任等，划出党内权力行使的范围和边界，令党内权力的行使建立在相应的规矩与制度之上，使广大党员乃至普通公民能够通过党内法规的明文规定监督党内权力的行使，确保党内权力不被滥用，实现党的自我约束、自我控权，令党成为合格有力的领导主体，确保其权力的行使能够始终坚守“为中国人民谋幸福，为中华民族谋复兴”的初心和使命。易言之，相对于宣示和保障党内权力的基本功能而言，党内法规的另一重要功能在于规范和制约党内权力，以此确保党始终严格自律、成为合格的领导主体。在此意义上，“制定党内法规的根本目的还在于实现中国共产党人的自律，从而为国家治理现代化的实现奠定坚定的领导主体”。正是基于此，党的十八大以来，以习近平同志为核心的党中央不断强化党内法规制度建设，修改或制定了《中国共产党纪律处分条例》《中国共产党党内监督条例》《中国共产党巡视工作条例》《中国共产党工作机关条例（试行）》等一系列党内法规，对党内权力的配置及行使进行了明确规范，比较有效地防范了党内权力的滥用，减少了党内决策失误，也为党内反腐提供了制度保障。制定系统化的党内法规，形成对党内权力的监督制约体系，确保“从严管党治党”目标的实现，已经成为党内权力监督制约的新模式。“中国共产党用系统化、规范化的党内法规和细密的政党制度调整党员的行为、用严厉的措施惩戒违反党内法规的行为，创造了世界上政党加强自我管理、自我加强权力监督约束的典范”。

III. The Two-Dimensional Functions of Intra-Party Regulations vis-à-vis Intra-Party Power Are Unified in the Party’s Political Needs

三、党内法规之于党内权力的两维功能统一于党的政治需要

Intra-Party regulations must both proclaim, safeguard and even strengthen intra-Party power, and supervise, standardize and restrict intra-Party power, presenting a two-dimensional character on the question of the functional orientation of intra-Party power. On the surface, these two functions of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power appear to conflict and contradict each other. But in reality, whether intra-Party regulations proclaim, safeguard and even strengthen intra-Party power, or supervise, standardize and restrict intra-Party power, their purpose is identical, with no substantive difference: both aim to ensure the standardization and political purposiveness of the exercise of intra-Party power, to ensure that intra-Party order is maintained, and to enable intra-Party power to better serve the Party’s needs in carrying out political activities. In other words, the above two functions of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power are essentially unified—both serve the Party’s political needs.

党内法规既要宣示、保障甚至强化党内权力，又要监督、规范和制约党内权力，在对党内权力功能定位的问题上呈现出两维性。表面上看，党内法规之于党内权力的这两种功能似乎是相互冲突、相互矛盾的。但实际上，党内法规无论宣示、保障甚至强化党内权力，还是监督、规范和制约党内权力，其目的都是一致的，并无实质性不同，即：两者都是为了确保党内权力行使的规范性和合政治目的性，确保党内秩序得到维护，使党内权力更好地服务于党从事政治活动的需要。换言之，党内法规之于党内权力的上述两个方面的功能实质上是统一的，即二者都服务于党的政治需要。

(I) The function of intra-Party regulations in proclaiming and safeguarding intra-Party power serves the Party’s political needs

（一）党内法规宣示和保障党内权力的功能服务于党的政治需要

The reason intra-Party regulations must proclaim, safeguard and even strengthen intra-Party power is to ensure the authority of the Party Central Committee, enhance the Party’s cohesion and centripetal force, strengthen the Party’s political execution capacity, thereby guaranteeing the unity of the entire Party’s action, enhancing the Party’s combat effectiveness, and ensuring that the Party conducts political activities more efficiently and smoothly. To this end, intra-Party regulations must clearly proclaim intra-Party power, especially the power of the Party Central Committee, and by safeguarding and strengthening the power of the Party Central Committee, prevent and avoid the emergence within the Party of “powers” that violate central spirit, fence off their own territory, set up their own mountain strongholds, or oppose the Central Committee, as well as “rights” of laxity, self-will, arrogance, and disobedience to orders.

党内法规之所以要宣示、保障甚至强化党内权力，其目的在于确保党中央权威，增强党的凝聚力和向心力，加强党的政治执行力，以此保障全党行动的统一性，提升党的战斗力，确保党更加高效顺利地开展政治活动。为此，党内法规必须明确宣示党内权力尤其是党中央权力，并通过保障和强化党中央的权力，防止和避免党内出现违背中央精神、自我圈地、自占山头、对抗中央的“权力”以及自由散漫、自行其是、唯我独尊、有令不行的“权利”。

From the history of Party building, the construction of the intra-Party regulations system has always served the Party’s political needs, continuously struggling against various erroneous “powers” or “rights” within the Party. In 1921, the Communist Party of China was founded and formulated the *First Program of the Communist Party of China*, becoming the Party’s first intra-Party regulation. In 1922, the Second National Congress of the CPC was convened and passed the first Party Constitution, beginning the pace of leading the construction of the intra-Party regulations system with the Party Constitution. Thereafter, intra-Party regulations have continuously proclaimed, confirmed, and consolidated the power of the Party Central Committee around the needs of the Party leading the people to seize political power and govern the country. During the New Democratic Revolution period, Zhang Guotao’s and Wang Ming’s acts of splitting and opposing the Party Central Committee posed serious challenges to the exercise of intra-Party power, directly harming the Party’s revolutionary cause. In response to these circumstances, Comrade Mao Zedong proposed at the enlarged Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC in 1938: “To put intra-Party relations on the right track, in addition to the four most important disciplines mentioned above, a more detailed set of intra-Party regulations must also be formulated to unify the actions of leading organs at all levels.” [18]18 See, e.g., Wang Hongzhi, “On the Standardization and Restriction of Intra-Party Power by Intra-Party Regulations,” *Seeking Truth*, 2017, no. 6. The plenary session reviewed and passed several important intra-Party regulations, including the *Decision of the Enlarged Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee on the Work Rules and Discipline of the Central Committee*, which effectively proclaimed and safeguarded the power and authority of the Party Central Committee, maintained the unity and solidarity of the entire Party, and ensured that the New Democratic Revolution, under the Party’s leadership, moved step by step toward victory. During the period of socialist revolution and construction, in response to the “Gao-Rao Incident” [19]19 Ibid. that intended to split the Central Committee, Comrade Mao Zedong pointed out at the National Conference of the Party in 1955: “Various correct policies, correct intra-Party regulations—such words and actions should of course be actively supported and integrated with.” The conference passed the *Resolution on the Establishment of the Central and Local Control Commissions of the Party*, and accordingly established the Central Control Commission, to more effectively wage a constant and resolute struggle against Party members’ violations of the Party Constitution, Party discipline, and state laws and decrees. After 1956, frequent political movements within the Party severely impacted the construction of the intra-Party regulations system, which failed to truly play its due role, causing the Party’s building and national governance to take many detours. For this reason, Comrade Deng Xiaoping, on the basis of deeply summarizing the experiences and lessons of the period of socialist revolution and construction, pointed out: “A country must have state laws, and a Party must have Party rules and Party laws… Without Party rules and Party laws, state laws are difficult to guarantee.” [20]20 “Rule by one person alone” (yiyantang) refers to a situation where a single leader monopolizes decision-making, suppressing democratic discussion and collective leadership within the Party. Influenced by this, the Fifth Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee of the CPC in 1980 passed the *Guiding Principles for Inner-Party Political Life*, [21]21 Xi re-establishing rules for the exercise of intra-Party power, once again confirming and proclaiming the authority of the Party Central Committee, and bringing the Party’s and the country’s undertakings back onto the right track. However, with the deepening of reform and opening up and the increasing infiltration of Western capitalist ideology, a tendency toward liberalism emerged within the Party, breeding some corruption, and the authority of the Party Central Committee was challenged, which also brought serious negative impacts on the construction of the rule of law in the country. Around the time of the 18th National Congress of the CPC, many chaotic phenomena appeared within the Party, including non-compliance with laws and discipline, corruption, and even open opposition to the Central Committee. For this reason, General

从党的建设的历史来看，党内法规制度建设一直都服务于党的政治需要，不断与党内各种错误的“权力”或“权利”作斗争。1921年中国共产党成立，制定了《中国共产党第一个纲领》，成为全党首部党内法规。1922年中共二大召开并通过第一部党章，开始了以党章引领党内法规制度建设的步伐。此后，党内法规一直围绕党领导人民夺取政权和治国理政的需要而不断宣示、确认和巩固党中央权力。新民主主义革命时期，张国焘、王明分裂及对抗党中央的行为对党内权力的行使造成严重挑战，直接危害了党的革命事业。针对这些情况，毛泽东同志在1938年扩大的中共六届六中全会上提出：“为使党内关系走上正轨，除了上述四项最重要的纪律外，还须制定一种较详细的党内法规，以统一各级领导机关的行动。”全会审议通过了《中共扩大的六中全会关于中央委员会工作规则与纪律的决定》等多部重要党内法规，有力宣示并保障了党中央权力及其权威，维护了全党的团结统一，确保了新民主主义革命在党的领导下一步步走向胜利。社会主义革命和建设时期，针对意图分裂中央的“高饶事件”，毛泽东同志在1955年召开的党的全国代表会议上指出：“各种正确的政策、正确的党内法规，这样一些言论、行动，当然要积极支持，打成一片。”会议通过了《关于成立党的中央和地方监察委员会的决议》，并依此成立了中央监察委员会，以便更有力地对党员违反党章党纪和国家法律法令的行为作经常的坚决的斗争。1956年之后，党内的政治运动频繁，党内法规制度建设受到严重影响，没有真正发挥应有作用，使党的建设与国家治理走了很多弯路。为此，邓小平同志在深刻总结社会主义革命和建设时期经验教训的基础上指出：“国要有国法，党要有党规党法……没有党规党法，国法就很难保障。”受此影响，1980年召开的党的十一届五中全会通过了《关于党内政治生活的若干准则》，为党内权力的行使重新订立了规矩，再次确认并宣示了党中央权威，令党和国家事业重回正轨。但伴随着改革开放的日渐深入以及西方资本主义思想的日益渗透，党内出现了自由主义倾向，滋生了一些腐败，党中央权威受到挑战，对国家法治建设也带来了严重负面影响。党的十八大前后，党内出现诸多不守法纪、贪污腐败甚至公然与党中央对抗的乱象。为此，习近平总书记在党的十八届四中全会上指出：“全面依法治国，必须努力形成国家法律法规和党内法规制度相辅相成、相互促进、相互保障的格局。”

In the Party’s history, the reason why Party leaders have repeatedly emphasized the importance of intra-Party regulations has basically been to use them to prevent and curb various erroneous “powers” or “rights” within the Party, so as to ensure the unity and solidarity of the entire Party, enabling it to always remain a strong and powerful Marxist Party, staying true to its original aspiration and founding mission and bravely undertaking its mission. The Party’s history shows that only by using intra-Party regulations to proclaim and guarantee intra-Party power, especially the power of the Party Central Committee, so that the Party forms a unified will and becomes a unified body for action, can it avoid and change the situation of “being too lenient, too loose, and too soft” in governing and managing the Party, and ensure the continuous advancement of the Party’s cause.

在党的历史上，党的领导人之所以不断强调党内法规的重要性，基本上都是为了借助党内法规来防范和遏制党内各种错误的“权力”或“权利”，以确保全党团结统一，能够始终作为一个坚强有力的马克思主义政党，不忘初心、勇担使命。党的历史表明，只有通过党内法规来宣示并保障党内权力尤其是党中央权力，使党形成统一的意志，成为一个行动的统一体，才能避免并改变管党治党“失之于宽、失之于松、失之于软”的状况，确保党的事业持续推进。

From the perspective of party political science, highly institutionalized parties thoroughly limit the room for maneuver of actors within the party. The organization exerts influence on actors, making their strategies “follow the rules.” This can restrict those internal powers within the party that intend to split and weaken it, making the party more united internally and more capable of fighting, thereby helping to achieve its political goals. Specifically for the Communist Party of China, which serves as the core leadership of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics, “the power of Party organizations is the condition for achieving centralized unity; without power, Party organizations cannot concentrate the scattered, diverse, and even conflicting wills of Party members to form the unified will of the Party.” Based on this, “more attention should be paid to maintaining and strengthening the leadership capabilities of Party organizations at all levels, preventing a state of power operation characterized by divided power, dispersed functions, and lack of integration, and ensuring the efficient integration of China’s constitutional structure.” Intra-Party regulations proclaiming and ensuring intra-Party power are clearly intended to uphold the authority of the Party Central Committee, ensure the formation of a unified will within the Party, safeguard and enhance the Party’s combat effectiveness, thereby making the Party more capable of achieving its political goals, achieving long-term governance, and forever maintaining its ruling status, so that it can lead the people in realizing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.

站在政党政治学的角度上，高度制度化的政党彻底限制了党内行动者的机动余地。组织会给行动者施加影响，让他们的策略“循规蹈矩”。这会限制政党内部那些意图分裂和弱化政党的内部权力，使政党内部更加团结，更具有战斗力，有助于实现其政治目标。具体到作为中国特色社会主义事业领导核心的中国共产党来说，“党组织的权力是实现集中统一的条件，党组织没有权力则无法集中分散的、多样的甚至是相左的党员意愿以形成党的统一意志”。基于此，“更要注意保持和强化各级党组织的领导能力，防止形成权力分割、职能分散、缺乏统合的权力运行状态，保障中国宪制结构的高效整合”。党内法规宣示和确保党内权力显然是为了维护党中央权威，确保党内形成统一的意志，保障并提升党的战斗力，从而使党更有能力实现其政治目标，做到长期执政，永葆其执政地位，从能够带领人民实现中华民族的伟大复兴。

(II) The Function of Intra-Party Regulations in Regulating and Restricting Intra-Party Power Also Serves the Party’s Political Needs

（二）党内法规规范和制约党内权力的功能亦服务于党的政治需要

“Intra-Party power is the dominant force for democratic governance within the Party, ensuring the authority of Party organizations and the orderly operation of political life.” However, there is a possibility that intra-Party power may be abused or used for personal gain. Once intra-Party power is improperly exercised, its impact on the Party will no longer be positive but will be fraught with danger. The abuse or misuse of intra-Party power for personal gain can damage the intra-Party power structure, infringe upon the interests of the vast majority of Party members and the broad masses of the people, undermine the foundation of the Party’s long-term governance, hinder the healthy development of the Party’s cause, and even threaten the Party’s existence. Therefore, the Party must rely on institutional rationality to prevent intra-Party power from being abused or used for personal gain. This mission falls upon intra-Party regulations, whose mission is to govern and manage the Party. In other words, in the face of the danger and harm of intra-Party power being abused or used for personal gain, the Party needs to use intra-Party regulations, which embody the Party’s institutional rationality, to supervise, guide, regulate, and restrict the exercise of intra-Party power, minimizing the space for its abuse or misuse to the greatest extent possible, so that the exercise of intra-Party power always correctly serves the Party’s political goals.

“党内权力是党内民主治理，确保党内组织权威和政治生活有序运行的主导性力量”，但党内权力存在被滥用和徇私的可能，一旦党内权力被不正确运用，则其对党的影响就不再是正向的，而将充满危险。党内权力的滥用或徇私会破坏党内权力结构，侵害广大党员及广大人民群众的利益，破坏党长期执政的基础，阻碍党的事业健康发展，甚至会威胁党的存在。因此，党必须借助制度理性来避免党内权力被滥用或徇私。而这样的使命就落到以管党治党为使命的党内法规身上。换言之，面对党内权力被滥用或徇私的危险及其危害，党需要通过党内法规这一体现党的制度理性的规范来监督、引导、规范和制约党内权力的行使，最大可能地压缩其被滥用或徇私的空间，使党内权力的行使始终正确服务于党的政治目标。

As a Marxist ruling party, the Communist Party of China is the leading core of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics. China’s Constitution clearly stipulates: The leadership of the Communist Party of China is the most essential feature of socialism with Chinese characteristics. As the ruling party and the leading core of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics, the CPC’s own Party building is of paramount importance, directly determining the success or failure of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics. This inevitably makes “to govern the country, the Party must first be governed; to govern the Party, it must be done strictly” the basic logic of contemporary Chinese state governance. For this reason, the CPC attaches great importance to its own Party building, repeatedly emphasizing that “the Party must supervise itself and govern itself comprehensively and strictly,” advocating governing the Party in accordance with regulations through a self-revolutionary spirit of turning inward, and using governing the Party in accordance with regulations to deeply advance comprehensive and strict governance of the Party, so as to lead and guarantee law-based governance through comprehensive and strict governance of the Party. The report of the 20th National Congress of the CPC pointed out: “The key to comprehensively building a modern socialist country and comprehensively advancing the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation lies in the Party. … We must unswervingly advance comprehensive and strict governance of the Party, deeply advance the great new project of Party building in the New Era, and use the Party’s self-revolution to lead social revolution.” From the perspective of Party building, “intra-Party regulations are the Party’s high degree of self-discipline regarding itself; they are behavioral norms actively proposed by the Party for its organizations and members based on its special nature and the need to maintain its advanced nature and purity, with requirements higher than those of national law,” and they are also the institutional guarantee for implementing comprehensive and strict governance of the Party and using the Party’s self-revolution to lead social revolution. Governing the Party in accordance with regulations is the inevitable outcome of the Party’s adherence to self-discipline; it is the objective choice for the Party to use intra-Party regulations—a system with higher and stricter requirements compared to national law—to carry out self-purification, self-improvement, self-renovation, and self-enhancement. And using intra-Party regulations to standardize and restrict intra-Party power, to supervise the exercise of intra-Party power, and to ensure that intra-Party power is always used on the correct track of “remaining true to our original aspiration and keeping our founding mission firmly in mind,” is a direct manifestation of the Party’s courage and skill in self-revolution.

作为马克思主义执政党，中国共产党是中国特色社会主义事业领导核心。我国《宪法》明确规定：中国共产党领导是中国特色社会主义最本质的特征。作为执政党以及中国特色社会主义事业领导核心，中国共产党自身的建设至关重要，直接决定着中国特色社会主义事业的兴衰成败。这注定了“治国必先治党，治党务必从严”成为当代中国国家治理的基本逻辑。正因为如此，中国共产党高度重视自身建设，反复强调“党要管党，全面从严治党”，主张以刀口向内的自我革命精神依规治党，并借助依规治党深入推进全面从严治党，以全面从严治党引领和保障全面依法治国。党的二十大报告指出：“全面建设社会主义现代化国家、全面推进中华民族伟大复兴，关键在党。……必须持之以恒推进全面从严治党，深入推进新时代党的建设新的伟大工程，以党的自我革命引领社会革命。”立足于党的建设的角度，“党内法规是党对于其自身的高度自律，是党基于其自身特殊的性质以及为保持自身先进性与纯洁性之需要而主动对其组织和成员提出的、在要求上高于国家法的行为规范”，也是贯彻落实全面从严治党、以党的自我革命引领社会革命的制度保障。依规治党是党坚持自律的必然产物，是党运用党内法规这一相比于国家法而言要求更高且规定更严的制度进行自我净化、自我完善、自我革新、自我提高的客观选择。而借助党内法规对党内权力加以规范和制约，以监督党内权力的行使，确保党内权力始终被运用在“不忘初心，牢记使命”的正确轨道上，则是党勇于自我革命并善于自我革命的直接体现。

As some scholars have pointed out: “Intra-Party power is a coercive and authoritative dominating force that has a significant impact on both intra-Party political life and extra-Party work activities. If intra-Party power is properly regulated, it will benefit the vast number of Party members and the people. If intra-Party power regulation goes out of control, it may produce disastrous consequences.” [18]18 See, e.g., Wang Hongzhi, “On the Standardization and Restriction of Intra-Party Power by Intra-Party Regulations,” *Seeking Truth*, 2017, no. 6. As a type of rule-of-law norm, the important political value of intra-Party regulations lies in rationally allocating intra-Party power, establishing a scientific and efficient intra-Party power operation mechanism and control mechanism, so as to achieve the following goals: “effectively preventing and controlling the abuse of the Party’s political power, while ensuring the smooth operation of the Party’s legitimate political power and management behavior, thereby making the operation of the Party’s political power rule-based, institutionalized, and orderly, forming a stable intra-Party political order.” [19]19 Ibid. Through their own clear rules, intra-Party regulations form standards and restrictions on intra-Party power, ensuring that the exercise of intra-Party power is based on regulations and has a basis, thereby ensuring intra-Party democracy, avoiding the emergence of “rule by one person alone,” [20]20 “Rule by one person alone” (yiyantang) refers to a situation where a single leader monopolizes decision-making, suppressing democratic discussion and collective leadership within the Party. preventing intra-Party power from being abused or used for personal gain, and ensuring that the exercise of intra-Party power always obeys and serves the need to improve the Party’s long-term governance capacity, serves the need to realize the Party’s original aspiration of seeking happiness for the Chinese people and its mission of rejuvenating the Chinese nation, and serves the need to realize the long-term stability and security of the country and the continuous advancement of the cause of socialism with Chinese characteristics.

正如有学者指出的：“党内权力是一种具有强制性和权威性的支配性力量，对党内政治生活和党外工作活动都会产生重要影响。党内权力规范得当，将造福于广大党员以及人民群众。如若党内权力规范失控，则可能产生灾难性后果。”党内法规作为一种法治规范，其存在的重要政治价值就是通过对党内权力进行合理分配，建立起科学高效的党内权力运行机制和控制机制，以达到如下目标，即：“既有效防止和控制党的政治权力的滥用，又确保党的合法的政治权力和管理行为的顺利运行，从而使党的政治权力运行规则化、制度化和有序化，形成稳定的党内政治秩序。”党内法规通过其自身明确的规则形成对党内权力的规范和制约，使党内权力的行使依规有据，能够确保党内民主，避免出现“一言堂”，防止党内权力被滥用或徇私，使党内权力的行使始终服从和服务于提高党的长期执政能力的需要，服务于实现党为中国人民谋幸福之初心与为中华民族谋复兴之使命的需要，服务于实现国家长治久安和中国特色社会主义事业不断推进的需要。

IV. Conclusion

四、结语

In terms of the functional orientation of intra-Party power, intra-Party regulations exhibit a two-dimensional nature: on the one hand, they must proclaim and guarantee intra-Party power; on the other hand, they must standardize and restrict intra-Party power. Whether intra-Party regulations proclaim and guarantee intra-Party power or standardize and restrict intra-Party power, both are based on the Party’s political needs. Intra-Party regulations must “on the one hand, control the malfeasance of abusing and misusing power, and on the other hand, control the dereliction of duty of not using or abandoning power, rectifying non-accountability, non-action, slow action, and false action,” and must “ensure the correct exercise of public power, better promote cadres to fulfill their duties and start businesses.” [21]21 Xi In this regard, although the above two basic functions of intra-Party regulations vis-à-vis intra-Party power seem to conflict and contradict each other, they are in fact dialectically unified and share a common goal orientation.

在对于党内权力的功能定位上，党内法规呈现出两维性，即：其一方面须宣示和保障党内权力，另一方面又要规范和制约党内权力。党内法规无论是宣示和保障党内权力，还是规范和制约党内权力，都基于党的政治需要。党内法规必须“一方面要管住乱用滥用权力的渎职行为，另一方面要管住不用弃用权力的失职行为，整治不担当、不作为、慢作为、假作为”，必须“保证公权力正确行使，更好促进干部履职尽责、干事创业”。就此而言，党内法规之于党内权力的以上两个方面的基本功能尽管看似相互冲突、存在矛盾，实则辩证统一，有共同的目标指向。

Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, under the high attention of the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core, the construction of the intra-Party regulations system has been vigorously advanced. A relatively complete intra-Party regulations system, with the Party Constitution as the foundation and norms and regulations as the backbone, covering all aspects of the Party’s leadership and Party building, has gradually taken shape. While the Party’s centralized and unified leadership has been further strengthened, intra-Party power has also been subject to more effective supervision and restriction, intra-Party corruption has been greatly curbed, and the Party’s conduct, government conduct, and even social conduct have been greatly improved. The effectiveness of governing the Party in accordance with regulations has gradually become apparent, and the great new project of Party building is showing its vitality. Intra-Party regulations have become the key guarantee for the Party to lead the people in creating one great achievement after another, and the most core code and most important institutional advantage of contemporary “China’s governance.” The functional positioning of intra-Party regulations as law determines that they must correctly handle intra-Party power, ensuring that intra-Party power always walks on the correct track and achieves scientific Party management and governance. To this end, in the process of institutional design, intra-Party regulations must strive to find the “golden section point” between proclaiming and guaranteeing intra-Party power and standardizing and restricting intra-Party power. While proclaiming and guaranteeing intra-Party power, they must truly realize effective supervision and restriction of intra-Party power, promoting the balance and optimization of the intra-Party power structure. “Only when considerations are appropriate can intra-Party regulations play a positive role and maintain the precision and effectiveness of the Party’s management and governance.” [22] Based on this, the goal of constructing the intra-Party regulations system must be positioned to form a complete intra-Party regulations system that covers all aspects of the Party’s leadership and Party building and is conducive to the scientific allocation of intra-Party power. It must “strengthen checks and balances, rationally decompose power, scientifically allocate power, with different types of power exercised by different departments, units, and individuals, forming a scientific power structure and operation mechanism.” [23] This is the objective requirement and inevitable choice for fully releasing the effectiveness of intra-Party regulations in managing and governing the Party and for giving full play to the political guarantee role of intra-Party regulations.

党的十八大以来，在以习近平同志为核心的党中央的高度重视下，党内法规制度建设全力推进，一个以党章为根本、以准则条例为主干，覆盖党的领导和党的建设各个方面且比较完善的党内法规体系已经逐步形成。党的集中统一领导得到进一步强化的同时，党内权力也受到较为有效的监督和制约，党内腐败被极大遏制，党风、政风乃至民风得到极大改善。依规治党的成效已经逐步显现，党的建设的新的伟大工程正在显现其勃勃生机。党内法规已经成为党领导人民创造一个又一个伟大成就的关键保障，成为当代“中国之治”最为核心的密码和最为重要的制度优势。党内法规作为法的功能定位决定了其必须要正确处理好党内权力，使党内权力始终行走在正确的轨道上，实现科学的管党治党。为此，党内法规在制度设计过程中必须努力找到宣示、保障党内权力以及规范、制约党内权力之间的“黄金分割点”，在宣示和保障党内权力的同时，真正实现对党内权力的有效监督与制约，推进党内权力结构的均衡和优化。“只有考量得当，党内法规才能发挥积极作用，维护党管党治党的精确性和有效性。”基于此，党内法规制度建设的目标必须定位于形成覆盖党的领导和党的建设各方面的，有助于科学配置党内权力的完善的党内法规制度体系，必须“要强化制约，合理分解权力，科学配置权力，不同性质的权力由不同部门、单位、个人行使，形成科学的权力结构和运行机制”。这是充分释放党内法规管党治党效能、发挥党内法规政治保障作用的客观要求与必然选择。

(Author’s brief biography: Liu Changqiu, Professor at the School of Discipline Inspection and Supervision, Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, Doctoral Supervisor, Adjunct Professor at the Law School of Wenzhou University)

（作者简介：刘长秋，上海政法学院纪检监察学院教授，博士生导师，温州大学法学院兼职教授）

Online Editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心