In regard to civil servant disciplinary action, the Chinese“Civil Servant Law” instituted a certain degree of regulatory standardization. However, in comparison to the German“Federal Disciplinary Law” and“Federal Civil Servant Law”, the current Chinese legislation appears to be rather generic and lacks a sufficient degree of practicability. Especially regarding some basic rights of the investigated civil servant during the course of disciplinary action (as e.g. participation in the investigation, access to files, right to a lawyer etc.),there is no specific regulation in the Civil Servant Law. Overall, the civil servant in China appears to be rather passive, lacking any possibility for active participation. In order to ensure the right’s protection of the investigated civil servant as well as to increase the objectivity of the process, some specific protective institutes in the German law might be considered in the future legislative adaptions of the“Civil Servant Law”.%针对公务员惩戒制度，中国《公务员法》进行了一定范围的法律规范。但与德国《联邦惩戒法》、《联邦公务员法》中的相应制度安排相比，中国目前的规定较为抽象并缺乏可操作性。尤其是针对公务员在惩戒程序中的部分基本权利，例如查看档案权、参与调查权、委托律师权等，《公务员法》均未作出规定。从整体上看，中国制度下的公务员在程序中的角色过于被动，几乎无机会主动参与调查环节。为了确保被惩戒公务员合法权利的保障并提高整体程序的客观性，可考虑将德国法律中部分具体权利保障制度纳入到《公务员法》今后的修订范围当中。
展开▼
