The Basic Path to the Ordered Coordination of Party Discipline and National Law in the New Era

The Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th Party Central Committee explicitly proposed “focusing on the coordination and harmonization of intra-Party regulations with national laws and regulations,” [n] aiming to construct a complete, rigorous, and effective system of laws, regulations, and rules, thereby comprehensively enhancing the effectiveness of institutional governance. The 19th National Congress of the CPC further emphasized “the organic unity of law-based governance and rule-based governance of the Party.” [n] The work report of the 19th Central Commission for Discipline Inspection to the 20th National Congress of the CPC [n] specified the need to “improve the execution mechanism for the mutual coordination, authoritative and efficient implementation of Party discipline and national law,” highlighting a practice-oriented approach to coordination at the level of institutional operation. The Third Plenary Session of the 20th Party Central Committee proposed “improving the coordination and harmonization mechanism between intra-Party regulations and national laws and regulations,” [n] which marks a new stage of moving from principled advocacy to institutionalized implementation. From an institutional logic perspective, the coordination mechanism between Party discipline and national law refers to achieving organic linkage and cooperative operation between Party discipline and national law through institutional design and procedural arrangements, thereby forming an effective integration of intra-Party oversight and state supervision, in order to advance comprehensive and strict governance of the Party in depth. At the same time, through “coordination between discipline and law” (纪法衔接), it achieves unity in value orientation, complementarity in functional positioning, and synergy in the implementation process between Party discipline and national law, providing intrinsic support for institutional execution. From a practical perspective, the newly revised Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Disciplinary Action [n] and the Supervision Law of the People’s Republic of China [n] have achieved important progress in promoting “coordination between discipline and law,” but in terms of institutional design, formulation procedures, and implementation mechanisms, it remains necessary to continuously deepen the construction of the “coordination between discipline and law” mechanism, promoting the organic unity of intra-Party oversight and state supervision.

党的十八届四中全会明确提出“注重党内法规同国家法律的衔接和协调”，旨在构建系统完备、严密有效的法律法规制度体系，全面提升制度治理效能。党的十九大进一步强调“依法治国和依规治党有机统一”，十九届中央纪律检查委员会向中国共产党第二十次全国代表大会的工作报告中则明确，要“健全党纪国法相互衔接、权威高效的执行机制”，凸显了制度运行层面对衔接的实践导向。党的二十届三中全会提出“健全党内法规同国家法律法规衔接协调机制”，这实现了从原则性倡导迈向机制化落实的新阶段。从制度逻辑上看，党的纪律与国家法律的衔接机制，是指通过制度设计和程序安排，实现党的纪律与国家法律之间的有机联系与协同运作，从而形成党内监督与国家监察的有效整合，以推动全面从严治党向纵深发展。同时，通过“纪法衔接”实现党纪与国法在价值取向上的统一性、功能定位上的互补性以及实施过程中的协同性，为制度执行提供内在支撑。从实践来看，新修订的《中国共产党纪律处分条例》与《中华人民共和国监察法》在推进“纪法衔接”方面取得了重要发展，但在制度设计、制定程序以及执行机制等方面仍需要持续深化“纪法衔接”机制建设，推动党内监督和国家监察有机统一。

I. The Value Implications of the Ordered Coordination of Party Discipline and National Law

一、党的纪律与国家法律有序衔接的价值意蕴

In the context of comprehensive and strict governance of the Party in the New Era, realizing “coordination between discipline and law” is an inherent requirement for a Marxist party to forever maintain its advanced nature, an essential element of constructing the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics, and an objective need for advancing the integrated efforts to ensure that officials dare not, cannot, and do not want to be corrupt. [n]

在新时代全面从严治党的背景下，实现“纪法衔接”是马克思主义政党永葆先进性的内在要求，是构建中国特色社会主义法治体系的应有之义，也是一体推进不敢腐、不能腐、不想腐的客观需要。

(A) An Inherent Requirement for a Marxist Party to Forever Maintain Its Advanced Nature

（一）马克思主义政党永葆先进性的内在要求

There is a profound intrinsic connection between the advanced nature of a Marxist party and “coordination between discipline and law.” Party discipline is an important guarantee for maintaining the Party’s advanced nature and purity, and the authority and stability of discipline also need to be better demonstrated through ordered coordination with national law.

马克思主义政党的先进性与“纪法衔接”之间存在着深刻的内在关联。党的纪律是保持政党先进性和纯洁性的重要保障，而纪律的权威性和稳定性也需要通过与国家法律的有序衔接来更好地展现。

Regarding discipline, Marx pointed out: “We must now absolutely obey Party discipline, otherwise everything will fall into difficulty.” This profoundly reveals the importance of Party discipline for the Party’s survival and development. Strict discipline provides behavioral norms for Party organizations and, more importantly, demarcates the boundaries of action for all Party members; it is the key to the Party’s continued strong cohesion and combat effectiveness. After the victory of the October Revolution, Lenin, concerning how to consolidate political power and build socialism, put forward a series of thoughts on maintaining the advanced nature of a Marxist ruling party. He pointed out that “if our Party did not have the strictest, truly iron discipline,” “then the Bolsheviks would not have been able to hold onto political power for even two and a half months, let alone two and a half years.” This not only emphasized individual Party members’ compliance with Party discipline but also stressed the importance of Party discipline for Party building and the revolutionary cause. At the same time, throughout the more than one hundred years of development of the Communist Party of China, there has been continuous recognition of the importance of discipline and the strengthening of discipline building. Mao Zedong pointed out, “The line is the ‘kingly way’ (王道), and discipline is the ‘hegemonic way’ (霸道); both are indispensable,” [n] emphasizing that the political line must complement strict discipline to ensure the Party’s unity and solidarity. Deng Xiaoping explicitly stated, “For a large country like ours, how can we become united and organized? First, rely on ideals; second, rely on discipline.” This prominently reveals the fundamental role of discipline in consolidating Party spirit and popular sentiment, achieving political mobilization, and providing institutionalized constraints.

在纪律方面，马克思指出：“我们现在必须绝对遵守党的纪律，否则一切都将陷入困境。”这深刻揭示党的纪律对于党生存和发展的重要性。严明的纪律为党组织提供了行为准则，更为全体党员划定了行动边界，是党始终保持强大凝聚力和战斗力的关键所在。列宁在十月革命胜利后，围绕如何巩固政权与建设社会主义，提出了一系列关于保持马克思主义执政党先进性的思想。他指出，“如果我们党没有极严格的真正铁的纪律”，“那么布尔什维克别说把政权保持两年半，就是两个半月也保持不住”。这不仅强调了党员个体对党的纪律的遵守，更强调了党的纪律对党的建设和革命事业的重要性。与此同时，在中国共产党百余年的发展历程中，不断认识纪律的重要性，加强纪律建设。毛泽东指出，“路线是‘王道’，纪律是‘霸道’，这两者都不可少”，强调政治路线必须与严明纪律相辅相成，方能确保党的团结统一。邓小平明确指出，“我们这么大一个国家，怎样才能团结起来、组织起来呢？一靠理想，二靠纪律”。这突出揭示了纪律在凝聚党心民心、实现政治动员与制度化约束方面所具有的基础性作用。

Regarding “coordination between discipline and law,” Marxist classical works repeatedly emphasize the importance of law. Marx pointed out, “The code is the Bible of the freedom of the people,” emphasizing the important value of law in the institutionalized guarantee of citizens’ freedom. Lenin, building on and developing Marx’s legal theory, further pointed out that the working class must “grasp and maintain political power, consolidate political power, by changing relations of ownership and implementing a new constitution.” This shows that, within the logic of Marxist theory, while emphasizing Party discipline as the core of maintaining a party’s advanced nature and purity, it also values the importance of law as a powerful tool for class struggle and state governance, and for the institutionalized consolidation of proletarian political power. It is within this theoretical lineage that the Communist Party of China, while inheriting and developing Marxist theory, has always insisted on basing its actions on China’s actual conditions and continuously advancing theoretical innovation, regarding the unification of discipline building and rule-of-law building as an important institutional arrangement for forever maintaining the Party’s advanced nature. Especially since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has more deeply recognized the significance of the rule of law for state governance. “Coordination between discipline and law” has gradually become an important topic in state governance, leading to the formation of institutional innovations represented by the National Commission of Supervision, [n] which unifies disciplinary supervision and legal supervision within the same body, achieving an organic fusion of discipline enforcement and law implementation. Therefore, “coordination between discipline and law” ensures that Party members, while abiding by national law, can consciously observe Party discipline, thus strengthening the external authority and internal restraint of discipline, continuously enhancing Party members’ awareness of discipline and rules, ensuring the implementation of the Party’s line, principles, and policies, strengthening the Party’s ability to resist external erosion and overcome internal laxity, ensuring that the Party, under long-term governance conditions, always remains at the forefront of the times and forever maintains the political character of a Marxist party.

在“纪法衔接”方面，马克思主义经典著作中多次强调法律的重要性。马克思指出，“法典就是人民自由的圣经”，强调法律在制度化保障公民自由中的重要价值。列宁则在继承和发展马克思法学理论的基础上进一步指出，工人阶级必须“通过改变同所有制的关系和实行新宪法来掌握和保持政权，巩固政权”。由此可见，在马克思主义理论逻辑中，强调党的纪律作为保持政党先进性和纯洁性的核心的同时，也重视法律作为阶级斗争和国家治理的有力工具以及对制度化巩固无产阶级政权的重要意义。正是在这一理论脉络下，中国共产党在继承和发展马克思主义理论的基础上，始终坚持立足中国实际并不断推进理论创新，把纪律建设与法治建设相统一视作永葆党的先进性的重要制度安排。特别是党的十八大以来，以习近平同志为核心的党中央更加深刻地认识到法治对于国家治理的重要意义。“纪法衔接”逐渐成为国家治理的重要议题，并形成了以国家监察委员会为代表的体制创新形式，将纪律监督与法律监督统一于同一机构之中，形成了纪律执行与法律实施的有机融合。因此，“纪法衔接”确保党员在遵守国家法律的同时能够自觉遵守党的纪律，从而强化了纪律的外在权威与内在约束，不断增强党员的纪律意识和规矩意识，确保党的路线方针政策得到贯彻执行，增强党抵御外部侵蚀、克服内部涣散的能力，保证党在长期执政条件下始终走在时代前列，永葆马克思主义政党的政治本色。

(B) An Essential Element of Constructing the Socialist Rule-of-Law System with Chinese Characteristics

（二）构建中国特色社会主义法治体系的应有之义

Party discipline and national law are two independent parts of the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics, corresponding respectively to the system of intra-Party regulations and the system of legal norms. Party discipline, as the key basis for regulating the internal management of Party organizations and the behavior of Party members, and national law, which supplements each other in content and provides mutual support, together lay a solid foundation for the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics. “Coordination between discipline and law” is a key link connecting intra-Party regulations and national law, playing an extremely crucial role in ensuring the harmony and consistency of the two and enhancing the overall effectiveness of the rule of law. From a content perspective, Party discipline mainly regulates the internal governance of Party organizations and the behavior of Party members, emphatically highlighting the Party’s discipline and organizational nature. It is an important guideline for strengthening Party building and standardizing the behavior of Party members. National law, on the other hand, mainly focuses on state-level governance and the regulation of citizen behavior, emphasizing the universality and compulsion of law. It is an important guarantee for maintaining social order and fairness and justice. The two have different emphases in content but complement each other, jointly constructing the complete framework of the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics. At the functional level, Party discipline, by regulating Party member behavior and strengthening Party building, provides a stable institutional guarantee for the Party’s long-term governance. National law, by maintaining social order and fairness and justice, provides strong rule-of-law support for the country’s stability and development. Although their functions differ, through coordination and harmonization they can achieve a complementary effect, jointly promoting the continuous improvement and development of the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics.

党的纪律与国家法律是中国特色社会主义法治体系中彼此独立的两个部分，分别对应党内法规体系和法律规范体系。党的纪律作为规范党组织内部管理以及党员行为的关键依据，和国家法律在内容上相互补充、彼此支撑，共同筑牢了中国特色社会主义法治体系的坚实基础。“纪法衔接”是连接党内法规与国家法律的关键环节，对于保障二者协调一致、提升法治的整体效能有着极为关键的作用。从内容来看，党的纪律主要规范党组织的内部治理和党员行为，着重突出党的纪律性与组织性，是加强党的建设和规范党员行为的重要遵循。国家法律则主要着眼于国家层面的治理和公民行为规范等，强调法律的普遍性与强制性，是维护社会秩序和公平正义的重要保障。二者在内容上各有侧重，又相互补充，共同构建起中国特色社会主义法治体系的完整框架。在功能层面，党的纪律通过规范党员行为、加强党的建设，为党的长期执政提供了稳固的制度保障。国家法律凭借维护社会秩序和公平正义，为国家的稳定和发展给予了有力的法治支撑，两者职能虽有区别，但通过协调与衔接能实现相辅相成的效果，共同推动着中国特色社会主义法治体系不断完善和发展。

The Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Major Issues Concerning Comprehensively Advancing Law-Based Governance, adopted at the Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the CPC, included intra-Party regulations in the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics for the first time, and put forward the major issue of "paying attention to the integration and coordination of intra-Party regulations with national law" [1]1 The Fourth Plenary Session of the 18th Party Central Committee (October 2014) focused comprehensively on advancing law-based governance. The phrase cited is from the official communiqué of the session.. In the report to the 19th National Congress of the CPC, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized the "organic unification of law-based governance and rule-based governance of the Party" and established it as an important element of the basic strategy for upholding and developing socialism with Chinese characteristics in the New Era [2]2 The 19th National Congress (October 2017) formally incorporated “rule-based governance of the Party” (依规治党) as a parallel pillar to law-based governance of the state.. In 2017, the CPC Central Committee issued the Opinions on Strengthening the Construction of the Intra-Party Regulations System, which further pointed out that strengthening the construction of intra-Party regulations is an important element in constructing the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics. The Regulations on the Formulation of Intra-Party Regulations of the CPC and the Provisions on the Filing and Review of Intra-Party Regulations and Normative Documents of the CPC explicitly require that intra-Party regulations must be consistent with the Constitution and law, and that Party cadres and members must act within the scope prescribed by the Constitution and law. This not only indicates that the formulation of Party discipline is always rooted in the spirit of the Constitution and law, but also helps to realize the internal unity of Party rules and discipline with national law. The Work Rules for Discipline Inspection and Oversight by the CPC Discipline Inspection Organs, implemented in 2019, further clarified "connecting the enforcement of discipline with the enforcement of law to realize the organic unity of Party supervision and state supervision." The Regulations on the Implementation of the Supervision Law of the People's Republic of China also explicitly requires "promoting the integration of discipline enforcement and law enforcement, and effectively linking with the judiciary," establishing a practical framework for the integration of discipline with law at the institutional level. Since the 20th National Congress of the CPC, the institutional arrangements for "the integration of discipline with law" (纪法衔接) have been continuously deepened. The newly revised Regulations on Disciplinary Sanctions of the CPC in January 2024, for the first time, established "the integration of discipline enforcement and law enforcement" (执纪执法贯通) as a principle that must be followed in the work of Party disciplinary sanctions, refined the clauses on "the integration of discipline with law," clarified the scope of illegal acts that should be subject to Party disciplinary sanctions, and introduced relevant provisions of national law to promote the matching of Party disciplinary sanctions with administrative sanctions, further strengthening the internal consistency of Party rules and discipline with national law. In July 2024, the Third Plenary Session of the 20th Central Committee of the CPC proposed "improving the mechanism for the integration and coordination of intra-Party regulations with national laws and regulations," making deeper and more specific arrangements for the work of "the integration of discipline with law." Party discipline and national law are extremely important for the construction of the socialist rule of law. If the two lack integration and coordination, it would be difficult to construct a complete rule-of-law system. "The integration of discipline with law" can ensure that Party discipline and national law are mutually coordinated and closely integrated in content, avoiding conflicts and contradictions between the two. At the same time, "the integration of discipline with law" can also promote mutual cooperation and support between Party discipline and national law in the enforcement process, forming a unified normative system, thereby enhancing the overall effectiveness of the rule of law.

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》，首次将党内法规纳入中国特色社会主义法治体系，并提出“注重党内法规同国家法律的衔接和协调”这一重大课题。在党的十九大报告中，习近平总书记强调“依法治国和依规治党有机统一”，并将其确立为新时代坚持和发展中国特色社会主义基本方略的重要内容。2017年中共中央印发的《关于加强党内法规制度建设的意见》进一步指出，加强党内法规建设是构建中国特色社会主义法治体系的重要内容。《中国共产党党内法规制定条例》以及《中国共产党党内法规和规范性文件备案规定》明确要求党内法规须与宪法和法律保持一致，党员干部必须在宪法和法律规定的范围内活动，不仅表明党纪的制定始终以宪法和法律的精神为根基，而且有助于实现党规党纪与国家法律的内在统一。2019年施行的《中国共产党纪律检查机关监督执纪工作规则》进一步明确“把执纪和执法贯通起来，实现党内监督和国家监察的有机统一”，《中华人民共和国监察法实施条例》亦明确要求“促进执纪执法贯通、有效衔接司法”，在制度层面初步确立纪法衔接的实践框架。党的二十大以来，“纪法衔接”制度安排持续深化，2024年1月新修订的《中国共产党纪律处分条例》，首次将“执纪执法贯通”确立为党的纪律处分工作必须遵循的原则，细化“纪法衔接”条款，明确应当受到党纪处分的违法行为范围，并通过引入国家法律相关规定推动党纪政务处分相匹配，进一步强化了党规党纪与国家法律的内在一致性。2024年7月，党的二十届三中全会提出“健全党内法规同国家法律法规衔接协调机制”，对“纪法衔接”工作进行了更加深入、更加具体的部署。党的纪律和国家法律对于社会主义法治建设极为重要，若二者缺乏衔接与协调，就难以构建完善的法治体系。“纪法衔接”能够确保党的纪律与国家法律在内容上相互协调、紧密衔接，避免两者产生冲突与矛盾。同时，“纪法衔接”还能推动党的纪律与国家法律在执行过程中相互配合、彼此支持，形成统一的规范体系，进而增强法治的整体效能。

(3) The objective need to integratively advance not daring to be corrupt, not being able to be corrupt, and not wanting to be corrupt [3]3 This work report was delivered at the 20th National Congress in October 2022. The Central Commission for Discipline Inspection is the Party’s highest internal disciplinary body.

（三）一体推进不敢腐、不能腐、不想腐的客观需要

"It is necessary to deeply advance the simultaneous investigation and governance of misconduct and corruption," and "to persist in linking the rectification of work styles, the enforcement of discipline, and the fight against corruption." On the one hand, "the integration of discipline with law" has become an important manifestation of China's use of rule-of-law thinking and methods to carry out anti-corruption work. Through "the integration of discipline with law," the conscious compliance with systems and rules by Party cadres and members can be continuously strengthened. With the dual force of Party discipline and national law, the deterrent effect is enhanced, promoting the in-depth development of anti-corruption work with rule-of-law thinking and methods. Party discipline and supervisory laws and regulations complement each other, forming a powerful synergy, "integrating the powerful deterrent effect of not daring to be corrupt, the rigid institutional restraint of not being able to be corrupt, and the ideological education advantage of not wanting to be corrupt," thereby creating a good political ecological environment. On the other hand, the perfection of institutions is a continuous practical process. Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, anti-corruption and clean governance work has achieved remarkable results. However, in actual anti-corruption work, due to unclear division of responsibilities and insufficient communication and coordination among multiple departments, problems such as dispersed forces and divided anti-corruption powers have gradually emerged. This requires us to change the previous situation where "discipline enforcement" and "law enforcement" were separated and incompatible, closely integrating Party discipline inspection with state supervision, ensuring the systematicness and coherence of anti-corruption work, constructing a comprehensive oversight system, concentrating the strong synergy of state supervision, avoiding duplication of labor and waste of resources, and improving the efficiency and quality of anti-corruption work.

“要深入推进风腐同查同治”“坚持正风肃纪反腐相贯通”。一方面，“纪法衔接”成为中国运用法治思维与方式开展反腐败工作的重要体现。通过“纪法衔接”能够不断强化党员干部对制度与规矩的自觉遵守，借助党纪和国法的双重力量增强威慑效果，以法治思维与方式推动反腐败工作深入开展。党纪与监察法律法规相互配合，形成强大合力，“把不敢腐的强大震慑效能、不能腐的刚性制度约束、不想腐的思想教育优势融于一体”，进而营造良好的政治生态环境。另一方面，制度的完善是一个持续的实践过程。党的十八大以来，反腐倡廉工作取得了显著成效。然而，在实际的反腐败工作中，由于多部门职责划分不够清晰、沟通协作不够顺畅，导致力量分散、反腐权力分割等问题逐渐暴露。这就要求我们改变以往“执纪”与“执法”相互分离、互不兼容的局面，将党的纪律检查与国家监察紧密结合，确保反腐败工作的系统性与连贯性，构建全面覆盖的监察体系，凝聚国家监察的强大合力，避免重复劳动与资源浪费，提高反腐败工作的效率与质量。

"The integration of discipline with law" is a key measure for concentrating anti-corruption synergy. In 2018, the reform of the state supervision system was implemented, establishing a state anti-corruption system with unified leadership by the Party, authoritative and efficient, and clarifying the institutional mechanism of the discipline inspection commission and the supervision commission working together in one office (合署办公). Under the model of working together in one office, "the integration of discipline with law" has become an important bridge and link for the smooth work of the discipline inspection commission and the supervision commission. On the one hand, "the integration of discipline with law" helps to realize the complementary advantages and collaborative cooperation between Party discipline inspection organs and state supervision organs in anti-corruption work. Party discipline inspection organs are mainly responsible for internal Party discipline inspection work, while state supervision organs supervise all public officials exercising public power according to law. Through "the integration of discipline with law," the two sides can achieve close cooperation in aspects such as sharing case leads, collaborating on investigation and evidence collection, and coordinating the transfer of cases for prosecution, ensuring the comprehensiveness and depth of anti-corruption work, fully leveraging the functional roles of Party discipline inspection and state supervision, forming a comprehensive and orderly coordinated anti-corruption synergy, and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of anti-corruption work. Only by organically integrating Party discipline with national law and ensuring the steady progress of anti-corruption work on the track of the rule of law can the authority and credibility of anti-corruption work be enhanced, while simultaneously protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the persons under investigation, and promoting the continuous improvement and development of the anti-corruption system and mechanism. On the other hand, "the integration of discipline with law" is the core link in realizing the organic unity of Party supervision and state supervision. Party supervision, as a key link in Party building, and state supervision, as a core element of the national governance system, complement each other. Through the establishment and improvement of the mechanism for "the integration of discipline with law," Party supervision and state supervision can be deeply integrated, forming comprehensive coverage of the scope of supervision, no blind spots in the targets of supervision, closed-loop management of the chain of responsibility, and organic unity of the institutional system. This promotes the mutual supplementation and mutual promotion of Party discipline and national law, drives the coordinated development of the power supervision system with other areas of Party building, and thus constructs a three-dimensional, multi-level supervision network over the operation of public power, maximizing the effectiveness of anti-corruption governance and ensuring that power operates in a standardized manner on the track of the rule of law.

“纪法衔接”是凝聚反腐合力的关键举措。2018年，实施国家监察体制改革，建立了由党统一领导、权威高效的国家反腐败体制，并明确了纪委监委合署办公的体制机制。在合署办公的模式下，“纪法衔接”成为纪委监委工作顺畅开展的重要桥梁与纽带。一方面，“纪法衔接”有助于实现党的纪律检查机关与监察机关在反腐败工作中的优势互补与协同合作。党的纪律检查机关主要负责党内纪律检查工作，而监察机关则依法对所有行使公权力的公职人员进行监察。通过“纪法衔接”双方可以在案件线索共享、调查取证协作、移送起诉配合等方面实现紧密合作，确保反腐败工作的全面性与深入性，充分发挥党的纪律检查与国家监察的职能作用，形成全面覆盖、协调有序的反腐败合力，提升反腐败工作的效率与效果。只有将党的纪律与国家法律有机融合，确保反腐败工作在法治轨道上稳步推进，才能增强反腐败工作的权威性与公信力，同时保障被调查人的合法权益，推动反腐败体制机制的不断完善与发展。另一方面，“纪法衔接”是实现党内监督与国家监察有机统一的核心环节。党内监督作为党的建设的关键环节，与国家监察这一国家治理体系的核心要素相辅相成。通过“纪法衔接”机制的建立与完善，党内监督与国家监察得以深度融合，形成了监督范围的全覆盖、监督对象的无死角、责任链条的闭环式管理以及制度体系的有机统一，促进党的纪律与国家法律互补互促，推动权力监督体系与党的建设其他领域协同发展，从而构建起对公权力运行的立体化、多层次监督网络，使反腐败治理效能能够最大化地释放，确保了权力在法治轨道上规范运行。

2. Key Aspects of the Orderly Integration of Party Discipline and National Law

二、党的纪律与国家法律有序衔接的重点方面

Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, the Party has made significant progress in promoting the orderly integration of Party discipline and national law by using various means. On the one hand, the concept of "the integration of discipline with law" has been continuously deepened, reflecting a transformation from principled advocacy to institutional construction; on the other hand, at the practical level, increasing attention has been paid to the integration of enforcement mechanisms, and systematic discussions on theoretical and practical issues have been carried out regarding the division of responsibilities, significantly enhancing the integration awareness of discipline enforcement and law enforcement personnel. However, currently, in aspects such as the systematic nature of institutional design, the standardization of formulation procedures, and the effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms, there is still a need to further deepen the construction of the mechanism for "the integration of discipline with law," and to promote the organic unity of Party supervision and state supervision.

党的十八大以来，党运用各种手段推进党的纪律与国家法律有序衔接取得了长足进步。一方面，“纪法衔接”的理念得到不断深化，体现了从原则倡导向制度构建的转化；另一方面，在实践层面，愈加注重执行机制的贯通衔接，并在责任划分上展开了对理论与现实问题的系统探讨，显著增强了执纪执法人员的衔接意识。然而，目前在制度设计的系统性、制定程序的规范性以及执行机制的有效性等方面仍需要进一步持续深化“纪法衔接”机制建设，推动党内监督和国家监察有机统一。

(1) Further standardizing the boundary between discipline and law

（一）进一步规范纪法边界

General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out: "In the past, there was the problem of not distinguishing between discipline and law, treating the legal bottom line that citizens cannot violate as the disciplinary bottom line for Party organizations and members, lowering the requirements for Party members," directly pointing to the risk of conflating discipline with law. From a theoretical perspective, the core function of Party discipline is to regulate the behavior of Party organizations and members, while law has the basic function of adjusting social relations among all citizens, legal persons, and other organizations. The two should operate independently within their respective normative domains, forming clear boundaries. However, with the deepening of the supervision system reform, problems such as "improper overflow of Party discipline" and "conflation of discipline and law" have gradually emerged in the practice of "the integration of discipline with law."

习近平总书记指出：“过去就存在纪法不分问题，把公民不能违反的法律底线作为党组织和党员的纪律底线，降低了对党员要求”，直指纪法混同风险。从理论层面看，党纪的核心功能在于规范党组织和党员的行为，而法律则以调整全体公民、法人及其他组织之间的社会关系为基本职能。二者本应在各自的规范领域内独立运行，形成清晰的边界。然而，随着监察体制改革不断深入，“纪法衔接”实践中逐渐显现出“党纪不当外溢”“纪法混同”等问题。

First, some Party discipline norms have a “spillover effect.” Party discipline primarily regulates internal Party affairs, but in practice it has improperly extended into the public sphere of society and even the level of state governance, thereby de facto imposing inappropriate constraints on non-Party members and non-Party organizations. Second, there is a conflation of the content of Party discipline and state law. Party discipline, as a political rule stricter than state law, aims to shape the vanguard nature and purity of Party members. If it remains only at the minimum level required by law, it in fact weakens the normative effectiveness of discipline and fails to highlight the political nature, timeliness, and guiding orientation of Party discipline. In practice, because Party members also hold the status of citizens, mistaken perceptions sometimes arise, such as “after disciplinary action, no further legal liability need be pursued” or “since state law already has provisions, Party discipline does not need to repeat them.” This tendency toward “replacing law with discipline” or “replacing discipline with law” not only violates the respective functional orientations of Party discipline and state law but also easily leads to improper accountability.

其一，部分党的纪律规范存在“溢出效应”。党纪主要调整党内事务，但在实践中却出现了向社会公共领域乃至国家治理层面不当延伸的现象，由此使非党员和非党组织事实上受到不当约束。其二，党纪与国法内容存在混同。党纪作为严于国法的政治规矩，旨在塑造党员的先进性和纯洁性，如果仅停留在法律的最低要求层面，实际上削弱了纪律的规范效能，也难以凸显党的纪律所具有的政治性、时代性和导向性。实践中，由于党员兼具公民身份，有时出现“党纪处理后无需再追究法律责任”“国法已有规定，党纪无需重复规定”的错误认知。这种“以纪代法”“以法代纪”的倾向，不仅违背了党纪国法各自的功能定位，也容易造成追责失当。

(II) Further Promoting Smooth Integration in Implementation

（二）进一步推进执行衔接畅通

The life of law lies in effective implementation. This applies not only to state law but equally to intra-Party regulations, the key basis for “governing the Party and running it strictly.” In concrete practice, General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out that institutional norms “are sometimes overly general, lacking specific quantitative standards, and thus become mere摆设 [ornaments]; sometimes they are disconnected from each other, lacking integration and coordination, failing to form a systematic institutional chain.” This constrains the full realization of the effectiveness of “the integration of discipline and law.” [13]13 The quotation is from a speech by Xi Jinping on improving the institutional system of the CPC. For the original Chinese term 摆设 (bǎishè), meaning decorative ornaments without practical use, the translators have retained the Chinese with an explanatory gloss.

法律的生命在于有效实施，不仅适用于国家法律，也同样适用于党内法规这一“管党治党”的关键依据。在具体实践中，习近平总书记指出，制度规范“有的过于原则、缺乏具体的量化标准，形同摆设；有的相互脱节、彼此缺乏衔接和协调配合，形不成系统化的制度链条”，这制约了“纪法衔接”效能的充分发挥。

First, the case referral mechanism still needs to be further smoothed. On the one hand, the criteria for referral are unclear. Current laws and regulations provide only principled statements on the criteria for referral of cases from discipline inspection and supervision agencies [14]14 Discipline inspection and supervision agencies (纪检监察机关) are the Party and state institutions responsible for overseeing Party discipline and government conduct, including the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection and its local counterparts. to judicial organs, lacking detailed implementation rules. When investigating cases of disciplinary or legal violations, discipline inspection and supervision agencies may, due to inaccurate judgments about the nature of the case and its legal consequences, fail to refer cases that should be transferred to judicial organs in a timely manner, imposing only Party disciplinary sanctions without legal punishment. On the other hand, the referral coordination mechanism still needs further improvement. Case referrals lack unified norms regarding specific procedures, material preparation, and procedural handling. Sometimes incomplete materials or procedures occur, leading to the return or delay of case referrals, thereby affecting the overall effectiveness of case investigation. Second, the conversion of evidence still needs further rationalization. There are significant differences between discipline inspection and supervision agencies and judicial organs in the collection, preservation, review, and use of evidence, which hinders the timely conversion of evidence. On the one hand, the evidence standards of the two need to be unified. When investigating disciplinary and illegal acts, the evidence standards and collection methods of discipline inspection and supervision agencies are not fully consistent with the legal requirements and evidence rules followed by judicial organs. On the other hand, the evidence conversion mechanism needs improvement. How evidence collected by discipline inspection and supervision agencies can be converted into evidence recognized by judicial organs requires clear operational procedures and unified recognition standards. During the conversion process, problems easily arise such as the form of evidence not meeting legal requirements, incomplete chains of evidence, and insufficient evidentiary weight. Third, the coordination and cooperation mechanism between discipline inspection and supervision agencies and judicial organs still needs further improvement. There is a lack of a unified information-sharing platform between the two, and information transmission channels are not smooth, leading to a failure by both sides to grasp timely and comprehensively information on case processing progress, difficulties faced, and needs, resulting in information asymmetry and resource waste. At the same time, for major, complex, and difficult cases, the two sides need to improve effective consultation mechanisms to reach consensus.

第一，案件移送机制仍需进一步畅通。一方面，移送标准模糊不清。现行法律法规对纪检监察机关向司法机关移送案件的标准仅作了原则性表述，缺少详尽的执行细则。在查办违纪违法案件时，纪检监察机关可能因对案件性质及法律后果判断失准，致使本应移送司法机关的案件未能及时移送，仅给予党纪处分而未进行法律制裁。另一方面，移送衔接机制仍需进一步健全。案件移送在具体流程、材料准备以及手续办理等方面缺乏统一规范，有时会出现材料不全、手续不完备等情况，导致案件移送被退回或延误，影响案件查办的整体效果。第二，证据转化仍需进一步理顺。纪检监察机关与司法机关在证据收集、固定、审查以及运用上存在显著差异，这阻碍了证据的及时转化。一方面，两者证据标准有待统一。纪检监察机关调查违纪违法行为时，其证据标准和收集方式与司法机关依据法律要求和证据规则的做法不完全相符。另一方面，证据转化机制有待完善。纪检监察机关收集的证据如何转化为司法机关认可的证据，需要明确的操作规程和统一的认定标准，在转化过程中易出现证据形式不符合法律要求、证据链不完整、证据效力不足等问题。第三，纪检监察机关与司法机关协作配合机制仍需进一步完善。二者之间缺少统一的信息共享平台，信息传递渠道不通畅，导致双方对案件处理进展、面临的困难和需求等信息未能及时、全面掌握，造成信息不对称和资源浪费的情况。同时，针对重大、复杂、疑难案件，双方有待完善有效的会商机制，以达成一致意见。

(III) Further Rationally Dividing Responsibility

（三）进一步合理划分责任

General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “Why are some laws and regulations not implemented or enforced? It is because responsibilities are unclear, rewards and punishments are not strict, and there are no rules to follow for punishing violations of laws and regulations.” The exercise of power can only be effectively implemented under the premise of clear responsibilities and traceable accountability procedures, so that legal and regulatory systems can be effectively enforced. In the process of steadfastly pursuing the path of law-based governance, all organizations and individuals, while enjoying rights, must also bear corresponding obligations. Once behavior crosses the line, it must be subject to corresponding accountability according to law, and under the same circumstances, the unity and consistency of accountability should be maintained. For leading Party cadres, Party discipline and state law should be clearly distinguished: under what circumstances should disciplinary responsibility be pursued, and under what circumstances should legal responsibility be pursued. If handled vaguely or punished arbitrarily, this not only violates the principle of law-based governance but also deviates from the requirement of rule-based Party governance. In practice, intra-Party disciplinary violations, duty-related legal violations, and duty-related crimes are three types of issues with different natures, each corresponding to different accountability systems. Intra-Party disciplinary violations refer to acts by Party members and cadres that violate the *Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Disciplinary Sanctions* [15]15 The *Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Disciplinary Sanctions* (中国共产党纪律处分条例) is a key intra-Party regulation specifying disciplinary violations and corresponding sanctions for Party members. and should be subject to corresponding Party disciplinary sanctions; duty-related legal violations refer to acts by public officials that violate national laws and regulations, requiring administrative sanctions according to law; duty-related crimes refer to acts by state personnel that violate the provisions on duty-related crimes in the *Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China* and must be pursued for criminal responsibility according to law. Although the three have clear distinctions in legal nature and subject of responsibility, in actual operation they may overlap and create integration difficulties. Looking at the accountability mechanisms, the types of punishment for Party disciplinary sanctions, administrative sanctions, and criminal responsibility differ. Party disciplinary sanctions mainly include warnings, serious warnings, removal from Party posts, etc.; administrative sanctions include warnings, demerits, major demerits, etc.; criminal responsibility involves penalties such as criminal detention and fixed-term imprisonment. In actual operation, if the types of punishment are not precisely distinguished, inappropriate penalties may be imposed. The severity of punishment for Party disciplinary sanctions, administrative sanctions, and criminal responsibility corresponding to the same act may differ, which could lead to inconsistent punishment outcomes for the same act, thereby weakening the fairness and authority of punishment.

习近平总书记指出：“有些法规制度为什么执行不了、落实不下去？就是因为责任不明确、奖惩不严格，违反了法规制度怎么惩罚无章可循。”权力的行使只有在责任清晰、追责有章可循的前提下，法律法规制度才能有效落实。在坚定不移地走全面依法治国之路的过程中，所有组织和个人在享有权利的同时，都必须承担相应义务。一旦行为越界，必须依法接受相应追责，且在相同情形下，应保持责任追究的统一性与一致性。对于党员领导干部而言，党纪与国法应当明确区分：在何种情形下应追究党纪责任以及何种情形下应追究法律责任。如果模糊处理、随意处分，不仅违背依法治国的原则，也背离依规治党的要求。在实践中，党内违纪、职务违法与职务犯罪是三类性质不同的问题，分别对应着不同的责任追究体系。党内违纪是指党员干部违反《中国共产党纪律处分条例》的行为，应当受到相应的党纪处分；职务违法是指公职人员违反国家法律法规的行为，需依法给予政务处分；职务犯罪则是指国家工作人员触犯《中华人民共和国刑法》中关于职务犯罪规定的行为，必须依法追究刑事责任。尽管三者在法律属性和责任主体上存在明确区分，但在实际操作中可能交叉重叠，形成衔接难题。就责任追究机制来看，党纪处分、政务处分和刑事责任的处罚种类各有不同。党纪处分主要包含警告、严重警告、撤销党内职务等，政务处分涵盖警告、记过、记大过等，刑事责任则涉及拘役、有期徒刑等刑罚。在实际操作中，若不能精准区分三者的处罚种类，就可能作出不恰当的处罚。同一行为所对应的党纪处分、政务处分和刑事责任，处罚轻重程度存在差异，这可能致使对同一行为的处罚结果不一致，进而削弱处罚的公正性与权威性。

(IV) Further Enhancing Awareness of the Integration of Discipline and Law

（四）进一步提升纪法衔接意识

The awareness of “integration of discipline and law” includes two dimensions: first, the consciousness of the integration agents to actively promote the work of integration; second, the initiative of the integration agents to consciously enhance their capabilities to meet existing integration needs.

“纪法衔接”意识包含双重维度：其一是指衔接主体主动推进衔接工作的自觉性，其二是指衔接主体自觉提升能力满足现有衔接需求的主动性。

On the one hand, the awareness of some “integration of discipline and law” agents to participate remains perceptual, lacking deep cognition of the significance and practical value of the “integration of discipline and law,” leading to insufficient momentum and poor implementation effects. Particularly under the influence of the mindset “better to do less than do more,” some Party members and cadres have not yet established a proper sense of responsibility and accountability. They simplistically believe that the work of “integration of discipline and law” is the specific responsibility of discipline inspection and supervision agencies and judicial organs, and that ordinary Party members and cadres need only adhere to basic discipline and legal provisions without deeply exploring the detailed aspects of “integration of discipline and law.” This mistaken perception causes their initiative and enthusiasm in participating in matters related to “integration of discipline and law” in work practice to need strengthening, which hinders the orderly development of “integration of discipline and law” work and damages the authority and seriousness of both Party discipline and state law. At the same time, some Party members and cadres understand the connotation of “integration of discipline and law” only superficially, limiting it to the single link of case referral, ignoring that “integration of discipline and law” is in fact a complex systemic project involving multiple departments and links. “Integration of discipline and law” requires discipline inspection and supervision agencies, judicial organs, and other relevant departments to establish closely connected integration mechanisms at multiple levels, including institutional design, procedural norms, information sharing, and collaborative cooperation. Due to this one-sided understanding, some Party members and cadres find it difficult to establish a correct concept of “integration of discipline and law” in actual work, thereby negatively impacting the in-depth advancement of “integration of discipline and law” work.

一方面，有的“纪法衔接”主体的参与意识仍存在感性化的情况，对“纪法衔接”的意义和现实价值缺乏深刻认知，导致“纪法衔接”推进力度不足、实施效果欠佳，特别是在“多一事不如少一事”观念的影响下，部分党员干部尚未树立起应有的责任担当意识，单纯地认为“纪法衔接”工作是纪检监察机关与司法机关的特定职责，作为普通党员干部仅需恪守基本纪律和法律条文，无需深入探究“纪法衔接”的细致环节，这种错误认知致使他们在工作实践中，参与“纪法衔接”事务的主动性与积极性有待加强，这会阻碍“纪法衔接”工作的有序开展，对党纪和国法的权威性与严肃性造成损害。同时，部分党员干部对“纪法衔接”的内涵理解停留在表面，仅仅把它局限于案件移送这一单一环节，忽视了“纪法衔接”实则是一项涉及多个部门、多个环节的复杂系统工程。“纪法衔接”要求纪检监察机关、司法机关以及其他相关部门，在制度设计、程序规范、信息共享以及协作配合等多个层面，构建起紧密无间的衔接机制。由于理解的片面性，部分党员干部在实际工作中难以树立正确的“纪法衔接”观念，从而对“纪法衔接”工作的深入推进产生负面影响。

On the other hand, the abilities and qualities of some current officials still fail to meet the strict requirements put forward by the “integration of discipline and law.” Whether a system can be effectively implemented depends critically on the executing subjects. As a mechanism that is new and involves intersecting functions, the “integration of discipline and law” presents new challenges to discipline inspection and supervision cadres in terms of knowledge reserves, modes of thinking, and work capabilities. “It requires discipline inspection and supervision cadres to integrate the ‘two rulers’ of Party rules and regulations and national law in terms of knowledge reserves, deeply fuse Party discipline thinking and rule-of-law thinking in terms of thinking, and combine the ability to conduct political education and persuasion interviews with the ability to lawfully obtain evidence in terms of capability.” However, in practice, some discipline inspection cadres generally suffer from insufficient knowledge of the law, and are not adept at applying rule-of-law thinking when handling cases, which may lead to deviations in the case-handling process. This practical situation directly affects the fairness and impartiality of discipline inspection and supervision organs when applying Party discipline to impose disciplinary sanctions and applying law to impose government sanctions, adversely impacting the effectiveness of the “integration of discipline and law.”

另一方面，当前部分干部的能力素质尚不能满足“纪法衔接”提出的严格要求。制度能否有效落实，关键在于执行主体。“纪法衔接”作为一个新兴且涉及职能交叉的机制，对纪检监察干部在知识储备、思维模式以及工作能力等方面均提出了新的挑战。“要求纪检监察干部在知识储备上对党规党纪和国家法律‘两把尺子’进行整合，在思维上对党纪思维和法治思维进行深度融合，能力上对思想政治教育谈话能力和依法依规调取证据能力进行复合。”然而在实践中，部分纪检干部普遍存在法律知识储备不足的问题，在办理案件时不善于运用法治思维，导致案件处理过程中可能出现偏差，这一现实状况直接影响到纪检监察机关在运用党纪作出纪律处分以及运用法律作出政务处分时的公平公正性，对“纪法衔接”工作的成效产生了不良影响。

III. Paths to Improve the Orderly Integration of Party Discipline and National Law

三、党的纪律与国家法律有序衔接的完善路径

In response to the key aspects that currently require strengthening for the orderly integration of Party discipline and national law, formulating corresponding working mechanisms can enhance the practical effectiveness of the “integration of discipline and law,” ensuring their coordinated operation, stability, and effectiveness. To this end, it is necessary to clarify the boundaries of norms to form the synergistic advantage of the “integration of discipline and law”; build a bridging mechanism to strengthen the combined effect of the “integration of discipline and law”; clarify accountability to perfect the bottom-line guarantee of the “integration of discipline and law”; and deepen awareness of integration to create a strong atmosphere for the “integration of discipline and law,” thereby safeguarding its implementation.

针对当下党的纪律与国家法律有序衔接有待加强的重点方面，制定相应工作机制能够提升“纪法衔接”工作实效，保证二者运行协同联动、稳定有效。为此，要厘清规范边界，形成“纪法衔接”的协同优势；构建衔接机制，强化“纪法衔接”的合力效应；明晰责任追究，完善“纪法衔接”的兜底保障；深化衔接意识，营造“纪法衔接”的浓厚氛围，为落实“纪法衔接”保驾护航。

(I) Clarify the Boundaries of Norms to Form the Synergistic Advantage of the Integration of Discipline and Law

（一）厘清规范边界，形成纪法衔接的协同优势

Clearly defining the applicable boundaries of Party discipline and national law, and accurately grasping the differences between the two, is the key to avoiding confusion or overstepping. General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized that in promoting the “integration of discipline and law,” it is necessary to “reasonably determine the attribution of power, delineate the boundaries of power, and clarify the power list,” clearly defining the objects of application and scope of adjustment of Party discipline and national law. Through institutional construction, “power is confined to the cage of institutions,” and the cage must be made solid and strong. Only in this way can the effectiveness of Party discipline and laws and regulations be fully realized, achieving an effective connection between supervision and discipline enforcement according to the Party Constitution and Party regulations and between supervision and law enforcement according to laws and regulations, thereby constructing a sound pattern of mutual support between Party discipline and laws and regulations.

清晰界定党纪和国法的适用边界，精准把握两者差异，是避免二者混淆或越界的关键。习近平总书记强调，在推进“纪法衔接”过程中，必须“合理确定权力归属，划清权力边界，厘清权力清单”，明确党纪与国法的适用对象及调整范围。通过制度建设，将“权力关进制度的笼子”，并确保笼子扎实牢固，只有如此，才能充分发挥党纪与法律法规的效能，实现依照党章党规监督执纪与依照法律法规监察执法的有效衔接，构建党纪和法律法规相互支撑的良好格局。

In the domain of parallel relations, the principle of separating discipline from law should be strictly followed. Party discipline needs to clarify the fields and scope of its adjustment, and should not involve provisions on matters reserved for law—that is, matters that only the Constitution and law have the authority to regulate, including national sovereignty, public power of official organs, citizens’ private rights, and citizens’ personal freedom. Adhere to the principle of “legal reservation,” [n] and eliminate the substitution of national law by Party discipline. “For Party discipline that has been tested in practice and should be transformed into law, it should be promptly transformed into national law through legal procedures.” At the same time, national law should not be misplaced, and should not make specific provisions on matters distinctively characterized by inner-Party governance, such as the establishment of Party organizations.

在平行关系领域，应严格遵循纪法分开原则。党纪需明确调整的领域和范围，不涉及法律保留事项的规定，即涵盖国家主权、公职机关公权力、公民私权利以及公民人身自由等唯有宪法和法律有权作出规定的事项。坚守“法律保留”原则，杜绝以党纪替代国家法律，“对于那些经过实践检验、应转化为法律的党纪，应及时通过法定程序将其转化为国家法律”。同时，国家法律也不能错位，不应针对党组织设立等党内治理特色鲜明的事项进行具体规定。

In the domain of interweaving and mutual integration, on the one hand, the spillover effects of Party discipline need to be reasonably regulated. Through purposive review, the adjustment by Party discipline should take maintaining the Party’s advanced nature and purity as its fundamental goal, serving the overall requirements of Party building. Matters adjusted by Party discipline should be closely related to the Party’s own construction, and the need for adjustment arises from the specificity of inner-Party affairs. When making adjustments, attention should be paid to ensuring that restrictions on ordinary citizens’ rights by Party discipline comply with the principle of proportionality, limiting the impact to the minimum necessary scope, without excessively infringing upon citizens’ lawful rights and interests. On the other hand, the basic principle of “discipline stricter than law, discipline before law, integration of discipline and law” must always be upheld. For violations of discipline by Party members and cadres, before they develop into serious duty-related illegal acts or duty-related crimes, Party discipline should be applied promptly to handle the matter, achieving the goal of educating and rescuing cadres. The scopes of application of Party discipline and national law should achieve seamless connection, forming a complete supervision closed loop, fully leveraging the synergistic effect of the two, and jointly constructing a strict power supervision system.

在交织互融领域，一方面，需合理规范党纪的溢出效应。通过目的性审查，党纪的调整应以维护党的先进性和纯洁性为根本目标，服务于党的建设的总体要求。党纪调整的事项应当与党的自身建设密切相关，且基于党内事务的特殊性而产生调整需求。调整时应当注意党纪对普通公民权利的限制应当遵循比例原则，将影响控制在必要的最小范围内，不得过度损害公民合法权益。另一方面，必须始终坚持“纪严于法、纪在法前、纪法衔接”的基本原则。对于党员干部的违纪行为，在其尚未发展为严重职务违法或职务犯罪时，应及时运用党纪进行处置，实现对干部的教育和挽救。党纪与国家法律的适用范围应当实现无缝对接，形成完整的监督闭环，充分发挥二者的协同效应，共同构建起严密的权力监督体系。

(II) Build a Bridging Mechanism to Strengthen the Combined Effect of the Integration of Discipline and Law

（二）构建衔接机制，强化纪法衔接的合力效应

General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized: “It must be systematic and complete, connected and matched,” and “must achieve forward-backward connection, left-right linkage, top-bottom coordination, and system integration.” This provides the overall guide for the construction of the “integration of discipline and law” mechanism.

习近平总书记强调：“要系统完备、衔接配套”，“必须做到前后衔接、左右联动、上下配套、系统集成”。这为“纪法衔接”机制建设提供了总体遵循。

First, establish and improve the case transfer mechanism. The management of leads runs through the entire process of case handling by disciplinary inspection and supervision commissions, and the quality of their precise triage and dynamic transfer directly affects the efficiency and effectiveness of case investigation. First, establish a joint conference system. By regularly convening joint conferences involving disciplinary inspection and supervision organs, judicial organs, and administrative organs, jointly study the standards and procedures for case transfer, communicate on situations, and coordinate to resolve problems and difficulties encountered during the case transfer process, promoting the smooth progress of case transfer work. Second, establish joint case handling teams. For major, complex, and difficult cases, disciplinary inspection and supervision organs, judicial organs, and administrative organs form joint case handling teams. Based on the nature and needs of the case, determine the composition of the team members and their division of responsibilities. After the case is investigated and concluded, the joint case handling team should promptly transfer the case to the judicial organs for processing according to the nature of the case and legal provisions. Thus, joint case handling teams enable various departments to leverage their respective professional advantages, support and cooperate with each other, improve the efficiency and quality of case investigation, and ensure that cases are handled fairly. Third, a dedicated case lead sharing platform should be established. Using internet technology, case leads can be stored, managed, and shared, providing functions such as data query, statistical analysis, and early warning prompts, facilitating various departments to grasp the case dynamics at any time, providing information and data support for implementing lead processing.

第一，建立健全案件移送机制。线索管理贯穿纪委监委办案全过程，其精准分流与动态流转的质量直接关系到案件查办的效率与成效。一是建立联席会议制度。通过定期召开由纪检监察机关、司法机关和行政机关共同参与的联席会议，就案件移送的标准和程序、案件移送过程中遇到的问题和困难共同研究、沟通情况、协调解决问题，推动案件移送工作的顺利进行。二是成立联合办案组。对于重大、复杂、疑难案件，由纪检监察机关、司法机关和行政机关共同组建联合办案组，根据案件性质和需要，确定办案组的组成人员和职责分工，联合办案组在案件查处完毕后，应根据案件性质和法律规定，及时将案件移送司法机关处理。由此可见，联合办案组能够使各部门发挥各自的专业优势，相互支持、相互配合，提高案件查处效率和质量，确保案件得到公正处理。三是应建立专门的案件线索共享平台。借助互联网技术，对案件线索进行存储、管理和共享，提供数据查询、统计分析、预警提示等功能，方便各部门随时掌握案件动态，为落实好线索处理提供信息数据支持。

Second, refine the regulations on evidence conversion. Evidence collected by supervisory organs must undergo a conversion procedure before it can become judicial evidence. Although supervisory evidence possesses legally recognized validity, to promote the efficient use of evidence, it is necessary to design corresponding conversion mechanisms for different types of evidence, ensuring smooth connection between various types of evidence. Specifically, physical evidence possesses objectivity and stability, can directly prove the relevant facts of the case, and given that the collection procedures for physical evidence are similar to those required in criminal proceedings, with identical standards of proof for legality and authenticity, this type of evidence can usually be directly adopted as valid evidence in criminal proceedings without going through the conversion procedure. However, verbal evidence, due to its low objectivity and stability and susceptibility to interference, would violate judicial fairness if converted to criminal evidence without verification. Therefore, verbal evidence collected by supervisory organs should be used only for reference; if suspicion of illegal evidence collection is discovered, the procuratorial organ should re-collect it to a high standard. At the same time, supervisory organs should make full audio and video recordings and transfer the case materials to the procuratorial organ.

第二，细化证据转化规定。监察机关所搜集的证据，需经转换程序方能成为司法证据。虽然监察证据具备法律上的认可效力，但为了促进证据的高效运用，有必要针对不同类型的证据设计相应的转化机制，确保各类证据之间能够顺畅衔接。具体而言，实物证据具有客观性、稳定性，能直接证明案件相关事实，且鉴于实物证据的收集程序与刑事诉讼要求相近，合法性与真实性证明标准相同，故而这类证据通常无需经过转换程序，即可直接采纳为刑事诉讼中的有效证据。然而，言词证据因客观性与稳定性较低、易受干扰，若未经核实即转化为刑事证据，将违背司法公正。因此，监察机关搜集的言词证据应仅作参考，若发现非法取证嫌疑，检察机关应高标准重新收集。同时，监察机关应全程录音录像，并将案件材料移送检察机关。

Third, to enhance the coordination efficiency of discipline enforcement and law enforcement work, the preliminary communication and coordination mechanism between discipline enforcement organs and law enforcement and judicial organs should be improved, with early intervention in cases. When a discipline enforcement organ, in the process of investigating a disciplinary violation case, believes that the case may involve illegal or criminal areas, it should promptly invite law enforcement and judicial organs to intervene early, and after imposing inner-Party disciplinary sanctions on the persons involved, promptly transfer the case to administrative or judicial organs for subsequent processing. Correspondingly, if judicial administrative organs, when handling a case, discover that the case involves issues of Party member disciplinary violations, they should also, depending on the specific circumstances, invite discipline enforcement organs to intervene early to support investigation and evidence collection and ensure the effective preservation of evidence. At the same time, construct a new working mechanism combining proactive intervention by procuratorial organs with invited intervention by supervisory organs. Procuratorial organs can both respond to invitations from supervisory organs to participate in cases and proactively intervene based on their own legal supervision functions, assisting supervisory organs in perfecting evidence collection work, ensuring the coherence and efficiency of the judicial process.

第三，为了提升执纪与执法工作的协同效率，应当完善执纪机关与执法、司法机关之间的前期沟通协调机制，提前介入案件。当执纪机关在调查违纪案件过程中，认为案情可能触及违法犯罪领域时，应当及时邀请执法、司法机关提前介入，并在对涉事人员给予党内纪律处分后，迅速将案件移交至行政、司法机关进行后续处理。相应地，司法行政机关在办理案件时，如若发现案情关联到党员违纪问题，也应视具体情况邀请执纪机关提前介入，以支持调查取证工作和确保证据的有效保存。同时，构建检察机关主动介入与监察机关邀请介入相结合的新型工作机制。检察机关既可以响应监察机关的邀请参与到案件中，也可以根据自身的法律监督职能主动介入，协助监察机关完善证据收集工作，确保司法流程的连贯性和高效性。

(III) Clarify Accountability to Perfect the Bottom-Line Guarantee of the Integration of Discipline and Law

（三）明晰责任追究，完善纪法衔接的兜底保障

General Secretary Xi Jinping stressed: “We must design institutions around responsibilities, and build systems around institutions,” clarifying the path for accountability, “so that responsibilities are clear, subjects are defined, institutions are effective, and implementation is efficient,” thereby achieving organic unity between Party discipline and state law in institutional design, disciplinary enforcement and law enforcement, and judicial integration.

习近平总书记强调：“要围绕责任设计制度，围绕制度构建体系”，明确责任追究路径，“做到责任清晰、主体明确、制度管用、行之有效”，使得党纪与国法在制度设计、执纪执法和司法衔接上有机统一。

In exploring the construction of the accountability system, the first task is to clarify the logical relationship among the three forms of responsibility. For violations of Party discipline, review and disciplinary action should be promptly carried out in accordance with the *Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Disciplinary Sanctions*. For duty-related illegal acts, they should be handled in accordance with laws and regulations such as the *Supervision Law of the People’s Republic of China* and the *Law of the People’s Republic of China on Administrative Sanctions for Public Officials*, and administrative sanctions should be imposed. For acts suspected of duty-related crimes, they should be dealt with strictly in accordance with the *Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China* and the *Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China*, and criminal penalties should be applied. In specific application, attention should be paid to adhering to the principle that discipline is stricter than law and takes precedence over law, with early detection and handling of disciplinary violations. At the same time, if discipline inspection and supervision agencies discover during their review and investigation that the person under review or investigation is suspected of duty-related crimes, they should promptly transfer the case to the procuratorial agency for lawful review and prosecution, and must not replace criminal penalties with Party disciplinary or administrative sanctions, so as to achieve “integration of discipline and law” (纪法衔接) and “unimpeded connection between discipline and law” (纪法贯通), ensuring the completeness and seriousness of accountability.

在探讨责任体系的构建时，一是要厘清三种责任形式之间的逻辑关系。对于党内违纪行为，应当依据《中国共产党纪律处分条例》及时进行党纪审查和处分。对于职务违法行为，应当依据《中华人民共和国监察法》《中华人民共和国公职人员政务处分法》等法律法规进行处理，给予政务处分。对于涉嫌职务犯罪的行为，应当严格依照《中华人民共和国刑法》《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》的规定处理，给予刑事处罚。在具体适用中，应当注意坚持纪严于法、纪在法前，对违纪问题早发现、早处理，同时，纪检监察机关在审查调查中发现被审查调查人涉嫌职务犯罪的，应当及时将案件移送检察机关依法审查起诉，不得以党纪政务处分代替刑事处罚，实现“纪法衔接”“纪法贯通”，确保责任追究的完整性和严肃性。

The second task is to correctly understand the parallel relationship between Party disciplinary sanctions and administrative sanctions. Although the *Law of the People’s Republic of China on Administrative Sanctions for Public Officials* specifies in detail the circumstances for applying administrative sanctions, this does not mean that one is higher or lower than the other in terms of the level of responsibility; rather, each has its own applicable domain and target group. In essence, both Party disciplinary sanctions and administrative sanctions are internal punitive measures within the organization and are identical in nature. As regards specific provisions, the design of sanction circumstances in the *Law of the People’s Republic of China on Administrative Sanctions for Public Officials* draws on and incorporates the specific provisions on circumstances of violations of Party discipline found in intra-Party regulations such as the *Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Disciplinary Sanctions*. This shows that both administrative sanctions and internal Party sanctions are methods of punishment for disciplinary or illegal acts within the system, and the two operate in parallel without conflict.

二是要正确认识党纪处分与政务处分的平行关系。尽管《中华人民共和国公职人员政务处分法》详细规定了政务处分的适用情形，但这并不意味着两者在责任层级上存在高低之分，而是各有其适用领域和目标群体。本质上，党纪处分与政务处分均属于组织内部的惩戒措施，性质相同。就具体条款来讲，在《中华人民共和国公职人员政务处分法》处分情形的设置上，借鉴吸收了《中国共产党纪律处分条例》等党内法规关于违反党纪情形的具体规定。这表明无论是政务处分还是党内处分，都是体系内部针对违纪或违法行为的惩处方式，两者在实际操作中并行不悖。

The third task is to flexibly grasp the strategy for applying Party disciplinary sanctions and administrative sanctions. When handling relatively minor disciplinary or illegal acts, one of the appropriate sanction measures should be selected based on the specific severity of the act; for serious disciplinary or illegal acts, the decision should be based on the nature and type of sanction. As regards minor disciplinary or illegal acts, since both Party disciplinary sanctions and administrative sanctions of the reprimand type (申诫类处分) do not affect the posts or ranks of Party cadres and public officials, accountability is mainly achieved by setting an “impact period” (影响期). Therefore, in such cases, Party disciplinary sanctions are sufficient to achieve the effect intended by administrative sanctions, and there is no need to superimpose the execution of administrative sanctions. However, when facing serious disciplinary or illegal acts, because Party disciplinary sanctions cannot directly adjust the official status of public functionaries, Party disciplinary sanctions and administrative sanctions should be used in combination to form a more powerful punitive synergy.

三是要灵活把握党纪处分与政务处分的适用策略。在处理轻微违纪违法行为时，应依据行为的具体严重程度，从中选择一种适当的处分措施；而对于严重违纪违法行为，则需依据处分的性质和类型来决定。就轻微违纪违法行为而言，由于党纪处分与政务处分中的申诫类处分均不会影响到党员干部的职务与职级，其责任追究主要通过设定“影响期”来实现。因此，在此类情况下，党纪处分已足以实现政务处分所要达到的效果，无需再叠加执行政务处分。然而，在面对严重违纪违法行为时，由于党纪处分无法直接调整公职人员的职务状态，故而将党纪处分与政务处分结合使用，以形成更为有力的惩戒合力。

(4) Deepening awareness of integration and creating a strong atmosphere for the integration of discipline and law

（四）深化衔接意识，营造纪法衔接的浓厚氛围

The ideological awareness of Party cadres and public officials is the internal driving force for behavioral norms. General Secretary Xi Jinping stressed that only when Party cadres and public officials “establish an awareness of the rule of law, an awareness of institutions, and an awareness of discipline” can they consciously abide by Party discipline and state law, internalizing disciplinary constraints in the heart and externalizing them in action.

党员干部思想意识是行为规范的内在动力，习近平总书记强调只有党员干部“树立法治意识、制度意识、纪律意识”才能自觉遵守党纪和国家法律，将纪律约束内化于心、外化于行。

To achieve the integration of Party discipline and state law, the first priority is to purify the environment of “integration of discipline and law” and create an effective integration environment where people “dare to integrate,” “are willing to integrate,” and “know how to integrate.” Strengthen publicity and education to raise ideological awareness. The integration of Party regulations and state law is not only a requirement at the institutional level but also a profound transformation at the ideological level. Through various forms of publicity and education, Party cadres and public officials should be helped to deeply understand the intrinsic connection between Party discipline and state law, to build up an awareness of “integration of discipline and law,” to enhance their self-consciousness regarding “integration of discipline and law,” and to strengthen the awareness of the rule of law and compliance with norms throughout society.

要实现党纪和国法相衔接，首要的就是净化“纪法衔接”环境，营造“敢衔接”“愿衔接”“会衔接”的有效衔接环境。加强宣传教育，提升思想认识，党规与国法的衔接不仅是制度层面的要求，更是思想意识层面的深刻转变。要通过多种形式的宣传教育，帮助党员干部及公职人员深刻理解党纪与国法的内在联系，筑牢“纪法衔接”意识，增强“纪法衔接”自觉，增强全社会的法治意识和规矩意识。

On the one hand, the integration of Party discipline and state law should be made an important component of the training of Party cadres and public officials. Special courses should be offered to systematically explain the relationship between Party discipline and state law, the necessity of their integration, and specific case studies in practice, helping Party cadres and public officials master the subject comprehensively from theory to practice and continuously deepen their understanding and grasp of the issue of integrating Party discipline and state law. Leading cadres should lead by example, taking the lead in studying Party discipline and state law, in abiding by Party discipline and state law, and in upholding the authority of Party discipline and state law, setting an example for society through concrete actions. At the same time, traditional media and new media platforms should be fully utilized, through news reports, special programs, short videos, and other forms, to popularize basic knowledge of Party discipline and state law, publicize the important significance and successful practices of integrating Party discipline and state law, create a strong public opinion atmosphere, and establish a good practice of respecting Party discipline and abiding by state law, thereby laying a solid ideological foundation for the effective integration of Party discipline and state law.

一方面，将党纪与国法的衔接作为党员干部培训的重要内容，开设专题课程，系统讲解党纪与国法的关系、衔接的必要性以及实践中的具体案例，帮助党员干部从理论到实践全面掌握，不断深化对党纪与国法衔接问题的认识和理解。领导干部要以身作则，带头学习党纪和国法，带头遵守党纪和国法，带头维护党纪和国法的权威，以实际行动为全社会树立榜样。同时，充分利用传统媒体和新媒体平台，通过新闻报道、专题节目、短视频等形式，普及党纪与国法的基本知识，宣传党纪与国法衔接的重要意义和成功实践，营造浓厚的舆论氛围，树立起尊重党纪、遵守国法的良好风尚，为党纪与国法的有效衔接奠定坚实的思想基础。

On the other hand, strengthening supervision and accountability mechanisms is the key to ensuring that the integration of Party discipline and state law is implemented. Establish and improve a scientific, rigorous, and efficient supervisory mechanism. Give full play to the role of intra-Party supervision, incorporate the implementation status of the integration of Party discipline and state law into the important content of inspection tours and special inspections [17]17 Inspection tours (巡视巡察) refer to the CPC’s internal supervision mechanism, where higher-level Party organizations dispatch teams to lower-level units to conduct comprehensive inspections of Party building, discipline enforcement, and policy implementation., and promptly rectify any problems discovered to ensure that the integration work is not a mere formality. For any act that violates Party discipline or state law, a “zero tolerance” attitude must be adhered to, and serious handling must be carried out in accordance with laws and regulations, thereby forming a powerful deterrent effect. At the same time, all sectors of society should be actively encouraged to participate in supervision, including legal supervision, media supervision, and public supervision, to form an all-around, multi-level supervisory network, ensuring that the formulation and implementation of Party discipline comply with the requirements of national laws and regulations, avoiding the phenomenon of “replacing law with the Party” (以党代法) or “replacing the Party with law” (以法代党), so that the integration of Party discipline and state law leaves no dead ends and no blind spots.

另一方面，强化监督问责机制是推动党纪与国法衔接落到实处的关键所在。建立健全科学、严密、高效的监督机制，充分发挥党内监督的作用，将党纪与国法相衔接的落实情况纳入巡视巡察、专项检查的重要内容，对发现的问题及时整改，确保衔接工作不走过场。对于任何违反党纪和国法的行为，都要坚持“零容忍”的态度，依法依规进行严肃处理，以此形成强有力的震慑效应。同时，还应该积极鼓励社会各界参与监督，包括法律监督、媒体监督、群众监督等，形成一张全方位、多层次的监督网络，确保党纪的制定和实施符合国家法律法规的要求，避免出现“以党代法”或“以法代党”的现象，使党纪与国法的衔接工作不留死角、不留盲区。