Safety inspectors, first of all, you need to study the law thoroughly! Advice from a lawyer……

Thread Content

At present, production safety accidents are frequent in our country, and after such accidents occur, it is common to hold safety supervision personnel criminally responsible for dereliction of duty. What should safety inspectors do in the face of prosecution charges? Drawing on his many years of experience in handling cases, criminal defense attorney Mr. Yang Hongbo offered the following suggestions to safety supervision professionals. Recommendation 1: Study laws and regulations more thoroughly to understand one’s responsibilities. Only by studying laws and regulations in depth can safety supervision officers be clear about their responsibilities, and it is only by understanding those responsibilities that they can carry out supervision in a targeted manner. Some safety inspection officials might think, “I’ve been doing supervision for so many years; how could I not be aware of my responsibilities?” ”Please do not take my advice as a joke; after working in regulation for so many years, it’s possible you have been confused all this time. As a safety supervisor, you work day and night to identify potential hazards in enterprises, exhausting yourself greatly. But have you ever really thought about whether this is indeed the task you should be doing? Not at all! The role of safety supervision officials is to urge enterprises to fulfill their primary responsibilities in accordance with the requirements of laws and regulations on work safety. Of course, the laws and regulations related to safe production are extremely complex, and it is not easy to master them; significant effort is required, as well as long-term and repeated study. Safety supervision mainly falls into three categories: comprehensive supervision, industry-specific supervision, and special-purpose supervision. If you are in the safety supervision agency, you should carry out two types of work: first, supervise and inspect the performance of regulatory duties by various safety-related authorities; second, urge enterprises in industries that are under direct supervision (such as those dealing with hazardous chemicals, fireworks, and industrial and commercial activities) to fulfill their responsibilities regarding safe production. If you are part of an industry supervision department, your targets for supervision are enterprises and institutions, and your task is to ensure that these entities fulfill their obligations related to safe production, rather than conducting inspections on their behalf. If you are in a specialized regulatory department, your scope of supervision is limited to the specific areas of enterprises, institutions, and government agencies. For example, the quality supervision bureau is responsible for overseeing the safe production of special equipment in enterprises. Recommendation 2: Fulfill duties conscientiously, keep proper records, and face investigations proactively. In their daily work, safety supervision officers must actively carry out the oversight responsibilities mandated by laws and regulations, and maintain corresponding records of their duties. However, after an accident occurs, safety inspection officials can still be subject to investigation. When a safety supervision officer is subject to compulsory measures, to a certain extent, he becomes \"opposed\" to the \"case handlers.\" By \"opposition,\" it is meant that the investigators need to verify the evidence and hold you accountable, while you try to prove that you have fulfilled your duties and therefore do not need to take any responsibility. It can be said that at this point, the demands of safety inspection officials are in conflict with, and irreconcilable to, the objectives of those handling the case. For a long time, some investigators have been accustomed to the presumption of guilt; in their eyes, you are not a suspect – they tend to assume from the outset that you are guilty, and all they need to do is find evidence to prove it. Although the use of torture to extract confessions has become rare in recent years, investigators often resort to inducement to obtain evidence in order to solve cases. They will use tactics such as \"cooperation will be rewarded, resistance will lead to harsher consequences\" and bail to trick you into saying things that may not reflect the truth. In the cases of dereliction of duty handled by the author, the interrogation records were filled with signs of the investigating authorities inducing confessions. Faced with attempts by the investigating authorities to coerce confessions, you must stay vigilant and under no circumstances say anything that goes against the facts out of unwillingness, lest you commit a serious mistake. After the interrogation, carefully check the transcript; don’t be afraid of the hassle. If there are errors in the record, we insist on corrections. The contents of the record are incomplete; supplements should be requested. To save time, the authorities handling the case often urge you to sign quickly; at such times, it’s important not to rush, but to read everything carefully first. Although Chinese law states that one should not rely too much on confessions, judicial authorities still often depend on them when handling cases, especially in cases of dereliction of duty such as those involving malfeasance. Once you are under investigation, it is essential to seek the help of a lawyer. A lawyer can answer your questions and point you in the right direction; a competent and conscientious lawyer will advocate for you in the best possible way. Advice 3: Go to great lengths to explain your responsibilities. Whether it is during the investigation phase, the prosecution phase, or the court trial phase, you may face the same question: Why weren’t the potential hazards of the accident identified? In the event of a production safety accident, especially one that results in deaths, there are surely many safety hazards that went undiscovered. Why wasn’t that hazard identified? And why wasn’t that other hazard detected either? Faced with the relentless stream of questions from the judicial authorities, one will surely be overwhelmed and find it extremely difficult to cope. Why does this happen? Because there’s a problem with this question itself! The Work Safety Law stipulates that production and business entities are the responsible parties for identifying and addressing potential hazards. The question of \"why were these hazards not detected\" should be directed at the production and business entities; why ask the work safety supervision authorities? In the face of such inappropriate questions, you can confidently explain your statutory duties and rule out matters that fall outside your scope of responsibility. Furthermore, regarding how you fulfilled your duties, you must repeatedly emphasize what efforts you made to carry out your responsibilities and what work you accomplished; you need to state these things clearly. Records of fulfilling duties diligently should be submitted to the investigating authorities as important evidence, with copies kept in case the prosecution fails to include them in the case files, so that the lawyer can submit them to the court. Advice 4: Work closely with your lawyer and do your utmost to defend yourself. It’s possible that despite all your efforts, you will still be sued in court. At this time, you may feel heartbroken and desperate, but! Please don’t blame others; it’s better for you to stay calm, prepare well for the trial, and make every last effort to prove your innocence. During a trial, presence is very important! After the prosecutor reads out the indictment, the judge repeatedly informs the defendant that pleading guilty voluntarily will result in a lighter sentence, whereas if the defendant refuses to plead guilty and is found guilty by the court, a heavier sentence will be imposed. If you are indeed guilty, that’s one thing, but if you are clearly innocent, what’s the point of admitting guilt? To solve this problem, some lawyers have their clients plead guilty, after which the lawyer proceeds to argue a defense of not guilty. They believe that this approach can secure a favorable attitude while also clarifying the defense of innocence, achieving two goals at once; I truly cannot agree with this. As mentioned earlier, the atmosphere during a trial is very important. If the entire trial is filled with the prosecutor’s accusations of guilt, leaving the parties and their lawyers at a loss for arguments and exhausted in trying to cope, that is the prosecutor’s dominance. If the judge also has preconceived biases, then no matter how passionate the lawyers are or how much effort they put in, the balance of power in the trial will inevitably tilt in favor of the prosecution. The court is a place for verbal battles, with thorough debate required to clarify the facts. Therefore, in court, lawyers and clients must work together with a shared goal, cooperating closely to create an atmosphere favorable to their side and strive for ultimate victory.