China's top legislature on Friday rectified some basic legislative body proceedings -- such mandating explanation on officials' dismissals or enforcing time limits on lawmakers' speeches, to ensure justice in legislation.

Previous procedures only required profiles of appointed officials, so the legislature omitted reasons for dismissing officials, which often baffled, not only the public, but also lawmakers who knew little about those dismissed.

The first such amendment since the rules of procedure were established 22 years ago was aimed at increasing efficiency and accountability of the legislature, said a document on the change from the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC).

The rules of procedure sets out formalities for meetings of the NPC Standing Committee, which considers important state laws and international conventions.

Prof. Cai Dingjian, a constitutional law expert at the Beijing-based China University of Political Science and Law, said the amendment legalizes the legislature's experience and practice over the last two decades and enhances efficiency of the body.

The amendment says bills on personnel changes should "include profiles of officials and reasons of appointment or dismissal."

The latest case in unexplained personnel changes was the removal of Zhu Zhigang in October from the post of head of the Budgetary Work Committee of NPC Standing Committee. Legislators barely explained the reasons for proposing Zhu's dismissal, but, nonetheless, the decision was voted for.

Not surprisingly, the public did not know the reason until a NPC spokesman revealed at a press conference later that Zhu was "under investigation for suspected violations of discipline and law."

Prof. Cai said the amendment ensures an open and transparent procedure of removing officials.

The People's Republic of China (PRC) Constitution says the NPC Standing Committee is entitled to decide cabinet ministers according to premier's nominations, members of the Central Military Commission, vice presidents of both the Supreme People's Court and Supreme People's Procuratorate, as well as ambassadors.

Prof. Hou Jianguo, president of the Hefei-based University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) who himself is an incumbent lawmaker, said, "More transparent procedures reflect progressiveness of the country's democracy."

The amendment also imposes stricter controls over the lengths of speeches by individual legislators and prevents digression by NPC Standing Committee members at legislative meetings.

"NPC Standing Committee members' speeches should not exceed 15 minutes at group meetings and a second speech on the same topic should not last more than 10 minutes," the new rule says.

Previous procedures only set out speech times for lawmakers at joint group sessions or plenary sessions that mainly hear law drafts or amendments or discuss major issues concerning legislation.

Detailed legislative discussions only take place at group meetings where each lawmaker can take time to offer opinions.

The amendment says "members of the NPC Standing Committee should address legislative plenary or group meetings within preset topics," and each speech should be approved by presiding officers.

Hou, a recognized chemist who is also member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), said practice shows that limiting speech times could ensure a thorough group discussion and opinions of each side being heard.

"It enhances the quality of lawmaking," he said.

Lawmakers in some countries and regions often make long speeches. or filibuster, so as to prevent the passage of laws that their parties do not agree with, as the parliamentary session has a fixed time and cannot be extended most of the time.

Prof. Cai said, "The delaying tactics seem inefficient in legislation but it's a tool for minority parties to strive for larger political say."

"The people's congress system is China's fundamental political system and is completely different from some western countries' parliamentary system," said an NPC Standing Committee member Guo Lei, head of a CAS institute.

Guo said, "It's natural that the top legislature's rules of procedures are different from those in other countries."

Prof. Michael Glennon at Tufts University's Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy in the United States, responded to a Xinhua email interview,"There is nothing wrong with time limits provided they are imposed equally, without regard to the political content of the speech."

"In U.S. Congress, both houses impose time limits, both in committee sessions and on the floor of each body," he said. "These limits are a function of the size of the body."

Noticing that time limits would ensure efficient legislative operations of the 435-member U.S. House of Representatives, Prof. Glennon said, however, "The limits must respect the right of the minority to be heard."

Prof. Wang Lei at Beijing University's Law School said, "Convening meetings to consider law and decide major sate matters is a major form for the top legislature to perform its duties."

"The amendment to the rules improve procedural democracy," he said, adding "Though only slight changes have been made, the significance is that the lawmaking body is paying more attention to legislative efficiency and quality."

Prof. Wang said the amendment "puts forward higher standards for NPC Standing Committee members" as they must express their views within a certain period of time and give much heed to the speech quality.

According to the amendment, more non-voting people can attend legislative sessions, including NPC deputies.

"With the improvement of the people's congress system, ordinary citizens could attend the sessions as well," Guo said. Currently, the public can only learn the bimonthly legislative sessions through media coverage.

Prof. Cai said there was still room for further improvement as the public did not know "what happened behind the doors of the legislature."

"The public attending legislative sessions could be an opportunity for public education about the country's political system, as well as public supervision," he said.

Prof. Cai suggests to strengthen plenary session discussions where direct exchanges of views, or even debate, on bills or motions, could let different opinions heard and be more democratic.

The constitutional law expert said dissenting lawmakers or those who had not voiced opinions, should express views first as "there is no time for each lawmaker taking turns to express views applauding submitted proposals."

Wu Bangguo, chairman of the NPC Standing Committee, said Friday that the procedural revisions would further standardize China's law-making practices while improving efficiency.

(Xinhua News Agency April 24, 2009)