Anti-corruption investigations in China are carried out by the Central Committee for Discipline Inspection (CCDI) and the National Supervision Commission (NSC), reminiscent of Mao’s rectification and self-criticism campaigns that characterized Mao’s Cultural Revolution purges. The CCDI in particular is at the core of corruption investigations at the central and provincial level since Xi Jinping took office, investigating and punishing more than 4 million cadres and nearly 500 senior officials since 2012.

Introduction

Corruption in China is not a recent phenomenon and nor are the anti-corruption efforts initiated by the state a new development. Corruption features prominently in China’s history, typically functioning as a special economic mechanism that was widespread and left unchecked in the build up to major political upheaval. The practice became increasingly visible after the reform and opening up of 1978, due to the injection of capital which created opportunities for Party and state officials to exploit state resources for private gain. Yet, tackling corruption took a back seat as China embraced capital and private enterprise, reflecting Deng Xiaoping’s phrase, “to get rich is glorious”.  Nearly four decades later in November 2012, China’s President Hu Jintao was warning the country and Party that systemic corruption could lead to the downfall of the Party and state. Picking up where Hu left off, President Xi Jinping, in his first speech as the Party’s General Secretary in 2013, highlighted graft and corruption as the most pressing challenge confronting the Party. A decade later, Xi’s anti-corruption drive is an all-encompassing campaign sweeping across the Party, state and private enterprises, eliminating his political opponents and becoming a hallmark of his tenure as China’s top leader.

Anti-corruption investigations in China are carried out by the Central Committee for Discipline Inspection (CCDI) and the National Supervision Commission (NSC), reminiscent of Mao’s rectification and self-criticism campaigns that characterized Mao’s Cultural Revolution purges. The CCDI in particular is at the core of corruption investigations at the central and provincial level since Xi Jinping took office, investigating and punishing more than 4 million cadres and nearly 500 senior officials since 2012. The CCDI even has its own TV program called “Zero-tolerance”, an annual production popular with the public for showcasing the body’s work in tacking graft and exposing the corruption and opulence of high-ranking members in the Party. 

Since 2018, the anti-corruption campaign has focused on non-CCP members as well, made possible by the formation of the NSC and passage of the Supervision Law to govern its operations. The Supervision Law has widened the range of targets to include managers of SOEs, administrators in public institutions and state officials across government branches. The anti-corruption campaign coincides with the arrival of Xi Jinping, evidenced by data released by the CCDI, which shows an increase in the prosecution of senior officials in 2013 compared to 2012. The inclusion of tigers and flies, Party and state officials, rivals and allies in the campaign has several pressing implications for elite politics in China and public perception of Xi’s regime. 

Ideology and Discipline

The anti-corruption campaign was set in motion by a sensational scandal in February 2012 involving Chongqing’s head of the Public Security Bureau who fled to the US consulate in Chengdu to seek asylum in the US. The incident revealed the alleged murder of a British businessman by Bo Xilai’s wife, which snowballed into rumours of a coup plot against Xi Jinping by Bo Xilai, Party Secretary of Chongqing, and Zhou Yongkang, Secretary of the Central Political and Legal Affairs Commission. Soon after the incident, Bo Xilai was dismissed from the Party and eventually sentenced to life in prison for bribery, abuse of power and embezzlement. The incident was followed by another high-profile investigation, this time focused on Liu Zhijun, the Minister of Railways responsible for China’s sprawling High-Speed Railway network. Liu Zhijun’s case was by far one of the most widely followed news stories in China and the prosecutions recommendation that he be given a lenient sentence was met with unanimous opposition by citizens across the country. These incidents cultivated the necessary public support for an anti-corruption campaign that was then in its infancy; however, this public support remains misguided by Party propaganda.

The anti-corruption campaign was supported by a Party Education Program (PEP) in 2012, the first of three such ideological education campaigns launched by Xi Jinping in his first term. The ‘Mass Line Program’ targeted Party cadres to rectify behaviours like hedonism, superficial conformity and inactiveness. The Politburo followed up with a directive called the ‘Eight Provisions’ in December 2012 that set concrete regulations to instil discipline among Party cadres: emphasising regular inspection visits to the local level, prohibiting ribbon cutting and cornerstone laying ceremonies, reducing the number of foreign visits, lower traffic controls when officials travel and other budgetary restrictions on the use of public finance for business meals and government cars. 

These provisions essentially set the rules for acceptable behaviour by Party officials that have become the basis for launching investigations. In operation for two years, the Mass Line Program was a populist measure emphasising austerity that removed the perks associated with Party positions. In the first year of the campaign, more than 30,000 Party officials were investigated and 7,600 of them were sanctioned for violations of the Eight Provisions. The second and third ideological campaign, the ‘Three Strict’ and ‘Two Studies’ programs, were slightly different in emphasis, focusing on political discipline and protocols that ensure loyalty to the Party center and Xi Jinping.

The ‘Three Stricts’ campaign was focused on the ethical conduct of Party officials, including offences like ideological deviances, sedition, espionage and treason. The concept of political protocols became popular between 2014 and 2016, with Xi urging officials to follow the unified Party center and later prohibiting alliance forming activity. One prominent example of prosecution for conducting unorganised political activity was the case against Ling Jihua, Hu Jintao’s former chief of staff, who was accused of organising a factional group called the Xishan society. Similarly, nearly 300 members connected to Zhou Yongkang, a retired Politburo Standing Committee member, were questioned or detained in 2014 while other leaders within the Sichuan faction were investigated as well, marking the first time a retired member of the Politburo Standing Committee (PBSC) was put on trial and imprisoned for life. 

On the other hand, Hebei Party Secretary, Zhou Benshun, was charged for expressing a dissenting opinion on the Eight Provisions directive by the Politburo, defying the orders of the Party center. Policing political discipline and loyalty to the Party center became the defining feature of the second wave of anti-corruption efforts. Shortly after, the Party center became concentrated in the office of President Xi Jinping who was elevated to the core of the Party leadership. By 2017, 15,000 Party members had received punishment for violations of Party discipline, more than the number of officials punished during the Tiananmen purge of 1989-1992. Another highlight of the political discipline campaign was the expulsion of 63 military generals, the largest such anti-corruption effort targeting the military in China’s modern history.

The ideology campaign that morphed into a political discipline campaign maintained its intensity until 2018, then expanded its reach to include the private sector, which continues to this day. The campaigns have heavily relied on disciplinary mechanisms like the CCDI and Central Inspection Teams (CIT) while punishment is mostly carried out by Party organisations and later handled by the state’s judicial bodies. The CCDI is now highly institutionalised, tackles corruption and roots out cliques and individuals challenging the authority of the Party core, Xi Jinping.

Expanded Focus

The scope of the anti-corruption campaign has expanded to countries outside China as well, evidenced by Operation Fox Hunt and Operation Sky Net. In 2015, the Chinese government released a list of 100 most wanted fugitives who fled to foreign countries and by 2017 the anti-corruption organisation managed to bring back 40 individuals on the list. In 2018 alone more than 1000 Chinese fugitives who fled abroad were brought back to the country, of which 307 were Party or government officials. The most high profile incident included the disappearance of the first Chinese head of Interpol, Meng Hongwei, who was detained in September 2018  during a visit to China and later sentenced to 13 years in jail. Between 2018 and 2020, the NSP claimed in its first work report that it brought back 3,848 fugitives from abroad and nearly 10 billion yuan in illegal funds. The operation to bring back fugitives from foreign countries is focused on white collar criminals, but is also deployed to target dissidents and political opponents.

The expansion of the CCDI and NSP’s operations abroad also accompanies a shift in the emphasis of the campaign. The CCDI has targeted bureaucratic inefficiency and performance related issues such as failure to meet key performance indicators, unaccountability to constituents and not complying with directives issued by the Party Center. For example, in January 2022, the Zhengzhou city Party Chief, Xu Liyi and 89 other officials were disciplined for their poor handling of the Henan floods that claimed the lives of 380 people in the city. Similarly, after an investigation by the CCDI into Hubei’s COVID-19 response, the provinces Party chief, Jiang Chaoliang, and the director of the provincial health commission were dismissed from their posts. 

Most recently, the anti-corruption campaign turned its attention to financial regulators, who the CCDI has accused of wielding regulatory power for personal gain, describing a revolving door relationship between business and government. The CCDI in October 2021 initiated a two-month long inspection of more than 20 financial institutions, like banks, stock exchanges, insurance regulators and asset management companies. So far, more than 40 officials in the financial sector have been investigated by the CCDI for financial crimes and violations of political discipline. One example is the case of Zhou Jiangyong, Hangzhou Party secretary with close ties to Alibaba, who was expelled for profiting from the disorderly expansion of private companies. The targeting of private companies and SOEs that began with a crackdown on tech companies and education firms has now swept through the financial sector. Most recently, in April 2022, nearly 17 officials including the President of China Merchants Bank, Tian Huiyu, were investigated or punished for violations of political discipline.

Conclusion 

The anti-corruption campaign and institutionalisation of Party organisations like the CCDI has massively affected elite politics, political culture and public perception of the CCP. The campaigns have permitted an increase in Xi Jinping’s unilateral ability to leverage political loyalty and discipline to regulate the behaviour of Party officials. Wang Qishan, the CCDI’s former head and close ally of Xi Jinping noted that killing tigers and swatting flies serves as a deterrent to corrupt officials, calling it the ‘Sword of Damocles’. Local officials and Party members at the center are now increasingly worried about an investigation into their past, incomes and conduct or the leak of information from other functionaries that could involve them in an investigation, especially if they present anti-establishment views. 

The proliferation of the CCDI units across all Party and state bodies has heightened the risk of being investigated upon presenting a threat to Xi. The anti-corruption campaign also has a dual effect on factions and cliques, dampening their operation on the one hand while also increasing the opposition to Xi’s efforts. Factions and cliques like the Xishan society, the Sichuan faction and Shaanxi faction, with the potential to destabilise leadership unity, were purged for forming alliances. As the anti-corruption struggle against Party members and vested business interests carries on, Xi increases the potential for opposition to his campaign and rule. Lastly, public perception of the anti-corruption campaign has been largely supportive of Xi’s efforts. Combined with corruption within the Party, the rising inequality in incomes in China is likely to generate support for the campaign as it moves forward. As the 20th Party Congress approaches, the anti-corruption drive shows no signs of slowing, indicating Xi’s resolve in maintaining his authority over the Party and demonstrating his willingness to shape the future of the CCP in his stride.

Author

Rahul Karan Reddy is a Senior Research Associate at Organisation for Research on China and Asia (ORCA). He works on domestic Chinese politics and trade, producing data-driven research in the form of reports, dashboards and digital media. He is the author of ‘Islands on the Rocks’, a monograph about the Senkaku/Diaoyu island dispute between China and Japan. Rahul was previously a research analyst at the Chennai Center for China Studies (C3S). He is the creator of the India-China Trade dashboard and the Chinese Provincial Development Indicators dashboard. His work has been published in The Diplomat, East Asia Forum, ISDP & Tokyo Review, among others. He can be reached via email at rahulkaran.reddy@gmail.com and @RahulKaranRedd1 on Twitter.

Subscribe now to our newsletter !

Get a daily dose of local and national news from China, top trends in Chinese social media and what it means for India and the region at large.

Please enter your name.
Looks good.
Please enter a valid email address.
Looks good.
Please accept the terms to continue.